Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10181994 - TC.1 TC Contra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE County DATE. October 10, 1994 SUBJECT: Report on the Actions Plans for Routes of Regional Significance SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Accept report. FISCAL IMPACT None. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The Transportation Committee provides this report to inform the Board of Supervisors of the status of the County's review of the "Circulation Draft" Action Plans prepared by the various Regislial Transportation Planning Committees. West County Action Plan (West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee - WCCTAC) Comments on the West County Action Plan were due September 16, 1994 . A copy of the County' s comments are attached as Exhibit A. Major policy issues related to this Action Plan are described below. Compliance with Traffic Service Objectives: The Action Plan does not establish a Traffic Service Objective (TSO) at the San Pablo Dam Road intersections at I-80 and at Appian Way. The policy implication of the TSO is that traffic congestion from regional growth can worsen at these intersections without any limitation. The County is concerned about not establishing any TSO CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: XX YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : Gayle Bishop Tom Torlakson ACTION OF BOARD ON qY APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _ OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS �— I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Steven Goetz, CDD, 646-2134 Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED cc: GMEDA PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK bF Public Works Department THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY , DEPUTY Report on the Actions Plans October 10, 1994 Page Two BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION (continued) these intersections and its implications on the quality of life for residents in the E1 Sobrante Valley. Traffic Congestion in the E1 Sobrante Area: The Action Plan established a LOS Range D for intersections on Regional Routes in the E1 Sobrante Valley, except for intersections on San Pablo Dam Road at I-80 and at Appian Way. The Action Plan anticipates that LOS will drop to 1. 12 and .94 volume-to-capacity ratios at these intersections in 2010 for the PM peak hour assuming the previous Richmond General Plan and construction of the San Pablo Dam Road couplet. The Richmond General Plan was recently updated to allow additional development in the El Sobrante Valley beyond that assumed in the Action Plan which could result in congestion on San Pablo Dam Road worse than anticipated by the Action Plan. Additionally, the LOS forecasts assume construction of city/county road improvements in the E1 Sobrante Valley that are not fully funded, and construction of the San Pablo Dam Road couplet which may not be feasible. The Action Plan needs to evaluate the implication of the Richmond General Plan Update on the LOS for Regional Routes in the E1 Sobrante Valley, alternatives to construction of the San Pablo Dam Road couplet, and identify actions WCCTAC jurisdictions should take to ensure partially funded road projects are implemented to mitigate the regional transportation impacts from future development in the E1 Sobrante Valley. This information is need to fully disclose to the Board of Supervisors and residents of the E1 Sobrante Valley the implications of growth from new development and the options evaluated to address this growth. Lamorinda Action Plan (Lamorinda Project Management Committee) Comments on the Lamorinda Action Plan were due September 30, 1994 . A copy of those comments are included as Exhibit B. The major issues involve Traffic Service Objectives (TSO's) and actions for the Caldecott Tunnel. Compliance with Traffic Service Objectives: The Lamorinda Action Plan is the only Action Plan in the County that demonstrates its Traffic Service Objectives will be met by 2010. Compliance with the TSO's is not based on the actions each jurisdiction will adopt, but on establishing TSO's that account for the growth assumed in the Action Plan's travel forecasts. Caldecott Tunnel: The County recommends the Action Plan contain a commitment to evaluate and implement projects that will provide priority treatment for High- Occupancy Vehicles (HOV's) at the approaches to the Caldecott Tunnel. The consultant response to the County's comment is to add an action to test an HOV bypass lane using the Gateway Boulevard westbound ramps. If adopted by the Lamorinda jurisdictions, this action will begin to address the County's concerns, however, the appropriate HOV bypass project may involve a more elaborate project than using the Gateway Boulevard ramps. No HOV priority treatment is recommended for the eastbound approach, despite the adopted policy of the Alameda Countywide Transportation Plan to consider such projects at the Caldecott Tunnel. The Lamorinda Action Plan should contain a commitment to work with Alameda County to develop a project to provide priority treatment for HOV's at the eastbound approach to the Caldecott Tunnel, since most users of the Tunnel are residents of Contra Costa County. The Action Plan does not contain actions to address the growth in traffic queues at the approaches to the Caldecott Tunnel. The County requested the Action Plan evaluate mainline metering at the tunnel entrance, similar to the metering at the Bay Bridge, to maximize the vehicle-carrying capacity of the Tunnel and reduce vehicle queues. Tri Valley Action Plan (Tri Valley Transportation Council Comments on the Tri Valley Action Plan are due November 4, 1994 . Staff is still reviewing the circulation draft and will report to the Board on the major issues affecting the County at a future meeting. 1