HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12192006 - C.126 • A
TO: Board of Supervisors ........
=- Contra
FROM: Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee
Costa
(Supervisor Federal Glover, Chair)
U,>Ac•iiii�,; County
DATE: December 11, 2006
SUBJECT. Report on the Measure J Strategic Plan and Proposition 1-B
;Z
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
ACCEPT Report.
FISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
At its June meeting, the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (Authority) authorized work on
the first Measure J Strategic Plan,which will cover a seven-year time period from FY 2009 to FY
2015. Approximately$577 million could be available for Measure J capital projects in that time
frame. The plan will need to prioritize projects and also adopt policies prior to the beginning of
Measure J on April 1, 2009.
CONTINUED ON ATTAC E X YES
RECOMMENDATI OFC U TY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
zq�
visorFSIGNATURES S el Pie ho deral D. Glover
ACTION OF-BOARD ON o G APPROVED ASR COMMENDED XC OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT _ A�' _) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE
ABSENT: ABST BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE
U'ANfi = � SHOWN.
Contact: Steven oetz (925/335-1240)
cc: Community Development Department (CDD) ATTESTED 1'�11q O(-e
JOHN CULLEN, CLERK OF
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
G:\Transportation\TWIC\2006\Board Orders\measureJ.strategicplan.doc
REPORT ON THE MEASURE J STRATEGIC PLAN AND PROPOSITION 1-13
December 11, 2006
Page 2
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (Continued)
To expedite construction of Measure J projects, the Authority has already committed to a $300
million bond issue in September 2009. Another bond issue of $150 million could follow in FY
2012. Bond proceeds are required to be expended within three years of issuance.
Subsequent to the June meeting, local jurisdictions have worked with their Regional Committees
to establish project priorities for the Strategic Plan. Table 1 lists the project priorities for each
region. This table also lists the funding target of Measure J Strategic Plan funds that the Authority
established for each region. Some regions exceeded their funding target.The Authority may need
to deviate from these funding targets in order to ensure that bond proceeds are spent within the
required time frames. For additional detail on each region's priorities, the Committee members
can refer to the Authority staff report which is attached as Exhibit A.
The schedule for the Measure J Strategic Plan was established in anticipation of the State
Infrastructure Bond being placed on the November 2006 ballot. Both Measure C and Measure J
funds can be used to leverage state bond revenue. Proposition 1 B allocates $4.5 billion to the
Corridor Mobility Improvement Account (CMIA)for strategic transportation projects statewide.
These funds will be allocated by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to projects
that have the ability to: 1) improve the performance of specific highway segments; 2) promote
geographic equity in the use of bond revenue; and 3) commence construction no later than
December 31, 2012. The CTC will adopt an initial program of projects by March 1, 2007.
At its November meeting the Authority adopted its priority list of candidate projects forthe CMIA.
These candidate projects reflect a two-tiered approach. Tier 1 includes projects that appear to
best fit the guidance provided by the CTC. Tier 2 includes other priority projects of the Authority.
The Tier 1 projects are included in Table 1. The funds requested for the Tier 1 projects reflect
the Authority's estimate of the County's fair share of CMIA funds. For additional detail on the
Authority's candidate projects, the Committee members can refer to the Authority staff report
which is attached as Exhibit B.
Based on the schedule forthe CMIA program,the Authority proposes the following schedule to
complete the Measure J Strategic Plan:
January: Finalize financial model for Measure J based on the Regional
Committee's priorities and determine cashflow needs.
February-March: Discuss policies for Measure J Strategic Plan
April-May: Present draft Strategic Plan
June: Finalize Strategic Plan
REPORT ON THE MEASURE J STRATEGIC PLAN AND PROPOSITION 1-13
December 11, 2006
Page 3
Table 1
Measure J Strategic Plan and
Corridor Management Improvement Account Priorities
Amounts in Millions$
Projects Request Funding Target Prop. 1 B(b)
West County
1 AC Transit Capital Improvements 1
2 WestCAT Bus Purchase 3.7
3 BART Capital Improvements 8.8
4 Hercules Rail Station 7.5
5 1-80/Central Ave. Interchange 14.0
6' 1-80/San Pablo Dam Rd. Interchange 16.0
Subtotal 51.0 49.0
Southwest County
7 Caldecott Tunnel 62.5 175.0
8 1-680 Norris Cyn HOV Ramps 12.5
Subtotal 75.0 75.0
Central County
9 Caldecott Tunnel 62.5 See above
10 Martinez Intermodal Station 10.0
11 1-680/SR 24 Phase 1 27.4
SR 242/Concord Ave. Interchange
12 Southbound Off-ramp 3.0
13 BART Capital Improvements 12.0
14 Major Streets Improvements (a) 60.3
15 1-680/Marina Vista Interchange studies 1.3
16 SR 242/Clayton Rd. Interchange studies 1.5
17 SR 4/Willow Pass Rd. Interchange studies 2.8
Subtotal 180.8 172.0
East County
18 SR 4 East Freeway Widening 121.2 85.0
19 SR 4 Bypass 83.1
20 eBART 150.0
Subtotal 354.3 281.0
Countywide Total 661.1 577.0 260.0
Notes
(a) County-sponsored projects include Pacheco Blvd widening, Kirker Pass truck climbing
lanes, and Alhambra Valley Rd. safety projects.
(b) Only includes"Tier 1" projects for the Corridor Management Improvement Account.
Exhibits
A: Contra Costa Transportation Authority Report, November 15, 2006
B: CCTA-Ad ministration & Projects Committee Report, December 7, 2006
EXHIBIT A
CCTA—Contra Costa Transportation Authority November 15,2006
Subject Measure J Strategic Plan: Summary of Regional Transportation
Planning Committees'Priorities.
Summary of Issues At its June meeting the Authority authorized work on the first Measure J
Strategic Plan. The Strategic Plan will cover a seven-year time period from
FY2009 through FY2015. Approximately$577 million could be available
for Measure J Capital Projects in that time frame. The plan will need to
prioritize projects and also adopt policies prior to the beginning of Measure J
on April 1,2009.
Subsequent to the June meeting,a letter was sent to the four RTPCs
requesting: 1)a list of priority Measure J capital projects expected to be
constructed by FY2015, 2)fact sheets for projects on the list, and 3)
identification of capital components of Measure J"hybrid"programs. Input
was requested by October 16,2006 to allow coordination of the Measure J
Strategic Plan with Authority submittals for funding from the proposed
Infrastructure Bond on the November ballot.
A summary of the RTPCs' recommendations is shown below. Following the
November election, staff will develop a set of project funding proposals that
are as consistent as possible with the RTPC submittals, given the likely
available funding. In addition, staff will bring to the Authority policy issues
that need to be addressed before drafting the Strategic Plan.
Recommendations None—For Information Only.
Financial Implications Measure J sales tax revenues are projected to exceed$2 billion over 25 years
(April 1,2009 through March 31, 2009).
Options N/A
Attachments A. Letter from TRANSPLAN dated October 12,2006
B. Letter from WCCTAC dated September 29,2006
C. Letter from SWAT dated September 29,2006
D. Letter from TRANSPAC dated September 29,2006
E. Measure J expenditure plan
Changes from
Committee
Background
The Strategic Plan will have four major components:
• Sales Tax Revenue Projections;
• A"Program of Projects"committing funding schedules for specific projects;
• A Cashflow projection to ensure funding needs are met; and
• A Policy section to guide the Strategic Plan and the implementation of Measure J projects and
programs.
\\Cctal4\sharri2\My Documents\04-APC Packets\2006\11-2-06\08-Measure J Strategic Plan.doc 4.A.8-1
CCTA—Contra Costa Transportation Authority November 15,2006
To expedite high priority projects throughout Contra Costa,the Authority has already committed to a$300
million bond issue in September 2009. Another bond issue of$150 million could follow in FY2012. Bond
proceeds can only be used for capital projects and are required to be expended within three years of
issuance.
Programs
Determining which programs will receive a set annual percentage of Measure J revenues will be one aspect
of the Strategic Plan preparation. However, at this time—consistent with the Measure J Financial
Framework adopted by the Authority in May—staff anticipates that Measure J revenues will be set aside
annually for the following programs:
Local Streets Maintenance&Improvements- 18%
Transportation for Livable Communities- 5%
Pedestrian,Bicycle and Trail Facilities- 1.5%
Bus Service- 5%
Transportation for Seniors&People with Disabilities—3.5%in FY 2010, increasing
0.1%annually thereafter.
Express Bus-4.3%
Commute Alternatives- I%
Additional Bus Transit Enhancements* -3.425%
Additional Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities- 1.15%
Safe Transportation for Children-4.545%
Ferry Service in West County-2.25%
Additional Local Streets and Roads Maintenance-2.1%
Additional Transportation for Livable Communities Grants-0.4%
Additional Pedestrian,Bicycle and Trail Facilities-0.04%
Subregional Transportation Needs - 1.53%
Congestion Management,Transportation Planning, Facilities and Services-3% (on
average; periodic model and plan updates may cause variations)
Administration - 1%
Sum 2:—59% ($363 million in escalated dollars through FY 2015)
*WCCTAC requested that$4.7 million of this hybrid program be set aside for a capital component to be advanced by the bonds.
Funding
Through 2015, Measure J sales tax revenues are estimated to total $613 million in escalated dollars(or
$477 million in constant 2004 dollars). Of that total, $363 million is assumed to be applied to programs
leaving approximately$250 million for capital projects and debt service. During the same period
approximately$123 million(escalated)will be needed for debt service on the two proposed bonds,leaving
approximately$127 million(escalated)in Measure J sales tax revenues to carry out Measure J projects.
Consequently,with $127 million in cash and $450 million in bond proceeds, approximately$577 million
will be available(through FY2015)for Major Capital Improvement Projects in Measure J Expenditure
Plan.
Funding Available for Capital Proiects by Sub-region
' Federal law tax exempt and arbitrage provisions mandate an explicit expenditure schedule for bond proceeds.
Penalties can accrue if milestones are not met.
2 Assumes"average"of 5%for Paratransit for simplicity.
\\CctaI4\.sharri2Wly Documents\04-APC Packets\2006\I I-2-06\08-Measure J Strategic Plan.doc 4.A.8-2
CCTA—Contra Costa Transportation Authority November 15,2006
It is anticipated that the allocation of bond proceeds and sales tax revenues for projects( $577 million)
would generally conform to the percentages of Measure J capital funds designated for each subregion in
the Measure J expenditure plan. This would translate into the following subregional shares for capital
projects(in escalated dollars),which serve as approximate capital project funding targets by sub-area:
Central County(TRANSPAC): $172 million(29.9%)
West County(WCCTAC): $49 million (8.4%)
Southwest County(SWAT): $75 million (12.9%)
East County(TRANSPLAN): $281 million(48.8%)
The Authority may find it appropriate or necessary to deviate from these approximate subregional shares,
particularly if expenditure of bond proceeds within the required time frames is not likely.
Advance Project Development Work Underway
To meet the expenditure requirements of the 2009 and subsequent bond issues, project readiness will be a
critical factor. The following projects are presumed to have a"leg up"on programming due to current
status.
East County
Significant advance project development work is already underway in East County,with the Authority
taking the lead on final design for State Route 4(east)—(Somersville to State Route 160—Phase 1). The
project is scheduled to be under construction in 2009 and we anticipate$125 million in Measure J funds
might be committed for FY2010 through FY2012.
In addition,BART and the Authority are working collaboratively on the environmental clearance phase for
eBART. Right of way activities are expected to be well underway by FY2009.
Central/Southwest County
In Central/Southwest County final design for the Caldecott Tunnel fourth bore is underway. The project is
currently scheduled to be under construction in 2009. Both Central and Southwest County are presumed to
share $62.5 million each in Measure J funding for the project(for a total of$125 million). The Authority
anticipates the project will remain a high priority in the two regions,absent a change in support or
circumstances.
Central County
In Central County,environmental clearance for the I-680/SR4 interchange(Phase 1 and 2) is underway.
There are potential projects in Central County's Measure J"Major Streets"category that could be
advanced. Martinez Intermodal Station(Phase 3) is also expected to use earmarked Measure J funds in the
early years of the program.
Southwest County
In Southwest County, San Ramon has expressed interest in advancing project development work
(preparation of project study report)for the I-680 HOV/Express bus ramps at Norris Canyon.
West County
In West County,Authority staff is taking the lead on project development work on the I-80/San Pablo Dam
Road interchange(environmental clearance)and I-80/Central Avenue interchange(preparation of project
\\Cctal4\sharri2\My Documents\04-APC Packets\2006\1 1-2-06\08-Measure J Strategic Plan.doc 4.A.8-3
CCTA-Contra Costa Transportation Authority November 15,2006
study report and environmental document).The City of Hercules is taking the lead in designing the
Hercules Rail Station. Staff is also in discussions with the City of Richmond relative to the Richmond
Parkway upgrade project.
Summary of RTPCs' Recommendations:
Subsequent to the June meeting,a letter was sent to the four RTPCs requesting: 1)a list of priority
Measure J capital projects expected to be constructed by FY2015,2) fact sheets for projects on the list, and
3) identification of capital components of Measure J"hybrid"programs. Input was requested by October
16, 2006 to allow coordination of the Measure J Strategic Plan with Authority submittals for funding from
the proposed Infrastructure Bond on the November ballot.
In general,the top priority projects recommended for funding in the First Strategic Plan are consistent with
the project development efforts underway.
In West County,the top priority projects(totaled $5]million)are:
1. AC Transit Capital Improvements(capital component of a hybrid program): $1 million
2. WestCAT Bus Purchases(capital component of a hybrid program): $3.7 million
3. BART Capital Improvements: $8.8 million
4. Hercules Rail Station$7.5 million
5. I-80/Central Avenue Interchange$14 million
6. I-80/San Pablo Dam Road Interchange$16 million
In Southwest County,the top priority projects(total$75 million)are:
1. Caldecott Tunnel: $62.5 million
2. I-680/Norris Canyon Direct HOV ramps(part of I-680 Carpool Lane Extension category): $12.5
million
In Central County,the top priority projects(total$180.8 million)are:
1. Caldecott Tunnel: $62.5 million
2. Martinez Intermodal Station: $10 million
3. I-680/SR4: $27.4 million
4. SR242/Concord Avenue Interchange Southbound Off-ramp: $3 million
5. BART Parking, Access,and Other Improvements: $12 million
6. Major Streets Improvements: $60.27 million ($12.27 million over available funding in Measure.I)
7. Project Development Work on:
a. I-680/Marina Vista Interchange: $1.3 million
b. SR242/Clayton Road Interchange NB on-ramp: $1.5 million
c. SR4/Willow Pass Interchange: $2.8 million
In East County,the top priority projects(total $354.3 million)are:
1. SR4 East Widening: $121.2 million
2. SR4 Bypass(Part of East County Corridors Category): $83.1 million
3. eBART: $150 million
\\CctaI4\sharri2\My Documents\04-APC Packets\2006\11-2-06\08-Measure J Strategic Plan.doc 4.A.8-4
CCTA—Contra Costa Transportation Authority November 15,2006
Staff has the following general comments on the submittals:
1. Only WCCTAC identified a capital component of a"hybrid"program that will be advanced with bond
proceeds. This program is"additional bus transit enhancements."
2. Both TRANSPAC and TRANSPLAN exceeded their overall targets. TRANSPLAN has indicated that
they intend to revisit their recommendations after the November elections and the completion of
additional technical analysis.
3. TRANSPAC funding needs for Major Arterials exceed available Measure J funding in that category.
4. At the last meeting, Authority staff recommended the following projects for funding from the
Infrastructure Bonds—Corridor Mobility Improvement Account(CMIA)—
a. Caldecott Tunnel 4 1 bore: $175 million($125 million in Measure J)
b. SR4 East Widening from Somersville to SRI 60: $85 million($125 million in Measure J)
c. 1-680 Auxiliary Lane from Sycamore Valley Road to Crow Canyon: $27 million(No Measure J
funds)
d. 1-680 NB Carpool Lane Extension from N. Main to SR242: $50 million($25 million in Measure J)
e. I-680/SR 4 Phase 1: $50 million($33 million in Measure J)
f. I-80 ITS: $40 million(No Measure J funds—ACCMA taking the lead on the project)
g. Vasco Road: $20 million
Proposed Schedule for the Development of the Strategic Plan
Nov—Dec 06: Identify impacts of elections results on RTPCs recommendations.
Jan 07: Finalize financial model for Measure J based on RTPCs input and determine cashflow
needs based on submitted information.
Feb—Mar 07: Discuss policies for Measure J Strategic Plan.
Apr—May 07: Present draft Strategic Plan.
Jun 07: Finalize Strategic Plan.
\\Ccta I 4\sharri2\My Documents\04-APC Packcts\2006\11-2-06\08-Measure J Strategic Plan.doc 4.A.8-5
Attachment A
TRANSPLAN Committee
East Contra Costa Transportation Planning
Antioch • Brentwood • Oakley. Pittsburg •Contra Costa County
October 12, 2006
Robert McCleary, Executive Director
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 100
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
Dear Bob:
Enclosed is TRANSPLAN's submittal for the Measure J strategic planning process. The
submittal also reflects proposed expenditures of the East Contra Costa subregional traffic
mitigation fee revenues to the year 2015, to the extent we know them at this early stage.
The enclosures include a spreadsheet showing proposed allocations from both revenue sources,
and a summary description which provides background and explanation for the spreadsheet.
Please let me know if you have questions about this draft submittal.
Sinc ely,
on Id P. Freitas
T SPLAN Commi e Chair
Enclosures(2)
y
C: TRANSPLANLTe
ittee
'rRANSPLANcalAdvisory ComDuitte4e
651 Pine Street, N. Wing-4,^Floor, Martinez CA 94553 4. A. $ ^ (j
Phone: (925) 335-12.01 Fax: (925) 335-1300 jarei(FDcd.cccountv.us www.transplan.us
Summary description of TR-ANSPLAN submittal for Measure J Strategic Plan
The TRANSPLAN Committee has three priority projects for which it intends to use Measure J
and East County fee revenues between now and 2015. The three projects, in priority order, are:
1) the State Route 4 Freeway Widening and HOV Project; 2) the State Route 4 Bypass; and 3)
eBART. These three projects are expected to use all Measure J capital funds that are available to
East County by 2015 and nearly all available East County fee revenue by 2015 as well (small
amounts of fee revenue will be made available for Vasco Road safety improvements in Contra
Costa and Alameda Counties, and for the pending State Route 239 study).
TRANSPLAN seeks to make as much progress as possible on all three of its priority projects
between now and 2015. For this reason East County project sponsors will continue to work on
project delivery activities relating to all three projects.
The attached spreadsheet shows a shortfall in Measure J funds by 2015 because the spreadsheet
has not been constrained to fit within the projected funding from Measure J. CCTA has asked the
regional committees to constrain their submittals, but TRANSPLAN does not yet have sufficient
information to make such decisions. There are three reasons for this. First, the annual needs for
eBART funds aren't known yet, because East County officials and BART are just now
developing a new scaled-down, phased project definition. More discussion is needed on this new
project definition. Rather than try to guess the timing and amounts of the Measure J funding
allocations for eBART, TRANSPLAN believes it is best to leave the $150 million in FY 2010 as
originally desired and wait until there is a clear consensus on the new project definition before
making changes.
Second, TRANSPLAN is awaiting the completion of technical analysis that will determine the
best sequencing of the later-phase components of the freeway widening and SR 4 Bypass
projects (and therefore the amount of Measure J and ECCRFFA funds needed each year). The
sequencing analysis will cover projects such as Phase 2 of the freeway widening project (eight
lanes to Hillcrest Avenue), widening the SR 4 Bypass to four lanes from Sand Creek Road to
Balfour Road, construction of the Balfour Road interchange and the freeway connector ramps
from the Bypass to SR 160. The analysis should be complete by the end of this calendar year.
Third, the optimal funding allocations could change if Measure IB, the state transportation
infrastructure bond, passes on the November ballot. This could specifically impact the SR 4
Freeway Widening and I-lOV Project, since that project is expected to be a good candidate for
competitive funding from the bond, according to CCTA staff. The prospects for bond funding are
noted in the footnotes on the attached spreadsheet.
For these reasons TRANSPLAN is submitting the attached draft even though it shows a shortfall,
because we don't yet have the information needed to financially constrain the plan. Rather than
constrain the plan now based on incomplete information, TRANSPLAN seeks to continue
project delivery work on all three of the priority projects and make as much progress as possible.
651 Pine Street, N. Wing-4,h Floor, Martinez CA 94553
Phone: (925) 335-1201 Fax: (925) 335-1300 igreiOed_cecounty.us www.trans plan.us v
Assumptions in spreadsheet estimates
The funding needs shown in the spreadsheet are based on the assumption of a commercial paper
program issued in fiscal year 2008, using financing costs provided to TRANSPLAN by CCTA
staff. However, TRANSPLAN believes it is worth pursuing the possibility of a commercial
paper program beginning in fiscal year 2007.
In regard to the SR 4 Bypass, the spreadsheet assumes construction of Segments 1 and 3 of the
Bypass as a baseline condition. Revenue fore these baseline projects is not shown on the
spreadsheet because these funds are already committed to construction of these two segments.
Additional funding needed
As the spreadsheet shows, additional funds will be needed to complete all three of East County's
top priority projects by 2015. The spreadsheet footnotes refer to the state transportation
infrastructure bond as one potential source of funds for the SR 4 freeway.
In addition, East County looks to 2009 when the current federal transportation act, known as
SAFETEA-LU, will expire and a new act presumably will be crafted. East County officials
expect to work with their congressional delegation to request funding for priority transportation
projects as part of the reauthorization process.
Contingency list
TRANSPLAN went through the exercise of developing a possible contingency list, as requested
by CCTA. However, after discussion over several meetings and with the realization that the top
three priorities exceed the base amount and contingency amount combined, TRANSPLAN has
determined that the three priority projects constitutes its contingency list as well as its base list.
Should any Measure J projects be delayed, TRANSPLAN's three priority projects will be in a
position to use Measure bond funds. As such, TRANSPLAN believes it is critical to continue
project development work on these projects to bring them to a state of readiness.
651 Pine Street, N. Wing-4«h Floor, Martinez CA 94553 D
Phone: (925) 335-1201 Fax: (925) 335-1300 jareiC�cd_cccountv.us www.transplan.us
�g x 2
o g �a a - � � _ :. e � a � � � s s a � x a s x � • m m � a
RR „ 5383 » 5i ' as b a " a
0
> E
Q F x$ k a s a x a a R a a x a a a a a R R a s 8 8
9
a
E -
w as aada aaaa as a
_ - - -
s: : A � � as aa � 3aa • aaxaxsa � aa � esa
a RR3 as a3am a3aaRaxaa3 „ 3 ax se o aij
LLY d Pf
3aa3 a - aa � aa3x = as 3 of g a e ag
$ xaa � ax � aa � a � sxasaasxaas as m �s x� �� � _ z =� Eo
2 a s a a 8 a x a a a a s a a x a a a a a a a a a M a s a g tj E
•
b _
1=L o
? E 8
F a
c i 3 > > V E
N m N j N mEg '-.'Ea A
Q Y 's S F E 8 R a
W i Y $
gs I >
— oo s
F ¢ $
V F R i uF m
4� � .416
i ^ = _ _ o a 2 E $ lu
o
2 ¢ C N C n O .L
IL W Y L) � :� � � � may+ u � F Y _± N � g � , ° S
:_ In
w ”' - w s - ¢ a g § . '� 31 Aim " 8
mE as °'ic aw d 8
I E
� ? � � m : '��d v � �� 3 � 3 � � D � � � � w� N _4 4 a "w LL • • 'P yy; _o
N O • m v
y mg
LL g ¢ u :3 3 3 »1 7 7 1 ° '� � s` g o W �i
gg ° 5 u
U5 'o• 'ya- u•a i W c=","j' y m 'm 2'm m m }is{ 8 8 5 a a< m F
V � � W V ' • • Y 6 R • _.N � f71 3�H � q � � 4 � � 6 A � 6 Q� ✓Ji� Q > > w �� � —LL C
w " cqu a s W Y W i v ! ° W U f U O Y
1 u —
Z
�: A. 8
WA
IC6 IC6 i WTI"?C
Attachment B
West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee _
September 29,2006
Mr. Robert McCleary
Executive Director
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 100 4 711
El Cerrito Pleasant Hill,CA 94523
Via FAX and US MAIL
RE: Measure J Bond Priority projects
HCrCuIes
Dear Mr.McCleary:
Over the past several months,at the request of the Authority,the West Contra Costa Transportation
Advisory Committee's(WCCTAC)Technical Advisory Committee(TAC)and Board of Directors
P i n o I e have been meeting to develop a project priority list for the next seven years to take advantage of
Measure J bond revenues($300 M in 2009 and potentially$150 M in 2012). Additionally,this
project prioritization exercise affects the Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program Update
(STMP)—or"Developer Fees"in West County—that will provide transportation funds for eleven
R i c h m o n d Projects, some of which.are also on the Measure J project list.
The WCCTAC-TAC and Board have worked diligently to ensure that revenues from Measure J and
the Developer Fees match the expenses for the projects,understanding that the Project Sponsors
requested more funds than anticipated revenue,which resulted in a prioritization exercise based upon
S a n P a b I o criteria that were approved by the TAC and the Board in July. The criteria included the following:
Tier 1: project readiness, full funding for the project or a usable segment and Tier 2: congestion
relief in the I-80 corridor, safety,and geographic equity. Attached is the detailed spreadsheet
showing the projected revenue,expenses,prioritized list of projects, and project funding(as
requested by the Project Sponsor). A summary of the priority projects(not in priority order)
follows.
1. AC Transit Capital Improvements(capital component of a hybrid project)—$1,000,000.
2. WestCAT Capital Improvements(capital component of a hybrid project)—$3,700,000.
AC Transit
3. BART Capital Improvements—$8,800,000.
4. Capital Corridor/Hercules Rail Station—$7,500,000:
B A R T 5. Centra]Avenuc/1-80 Interchange—$14,000,000.
6. San Pablo Dam Road/I-80 Interchange—$16,000,000.
Contra Costa Total: $51,000,000
County
WestCAT
ONE.ALVARADO SQUARE SAN PABLO • CA 94806
TEL 510.21.5.3035 FAX 510.235.7059 If.• �• � /0
TEL
ti:�3;'v.,1:::a.• n::S:i:4i:w::...`;;
Mr. Robert McCleary
September 29,2006
Measure J Bond Priority Projects
Page 2
Contingency Projects(in priority order)—Should any of the projects listed above be unable to
expend the funding by 2015,additional BART Capital improvements($6,700,000)and the
Richmond Parkway($16,000,000)are the WCCTAC contingency projects.
We look forward to working with the Authority and the other Regional Transportation Planning
Committees to ensure that the Measure J projects are constructed in a timely manner. Should you
need additional information,please contact Lisa Hammon,Managing Director,at 510.215.3044.
Sincerely,
Sharon J. Brown,Chair
cc: WCCTAC(packet mailing)
4, A• '
Attachment C
S WAI -T
` -
w Danville Lafayette Moraga Orinda San Ration& the County of Contra Costa
270W C n
September 29, 2006 r
I„1
Robert K. McCleary
nCT � 2.00EContra Costa Transportation Authority
�� {�
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 100
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 - Y1•-
B
Dear Mr. McCleary:
At the Southwest Area Transportation Committee (SWAT) meeting on September 25, 2006 the
following issues were discussed:
Status Update and Clarification of the Town of Danville's proposal to provide SWAT
Administrative Services: The Committee directed the Chair and Vice Chair to execute the
Memorandum of Understanding with the Town of Danville for SWAT Administrative Services.
Appoint one SWAT TAC Committee representative to the I-680 Express Bus Access and
HOV Lane System Regional Measure 2 Study. The Committee accepted the TAC's
recommendation to appoint the San Ramon TAC member as the primary representative and the
County TAC member as the alternate.
Review and Approve SWAT Measure J Strategic Plan Amendments. With a few
modifications, the Committee accepted the TAC's recommendations contained in Attachment A.
Review and comment on Proposed Amendments to the Measure J Growth Management
Program Urban Limit Line. The Committee directed staff to draft a letter summarizing their
comments on the amendments to the ULL to CCTA(Attachment B).
The next SWAT meeting has been scheduled for November 6, 2006 in the Town of Moraga at
2100 Donald Drive. Please contact me at (925) 314-3313, if you have any questions regarding
this correspondence.
Sincerely,
Tai I Williams
SWAT TAC Member
Attachments
4.A. g� !Z
September 29, 2006
SWAT
Attachment A
47 . IT. 8 r '�
Measure J Strategic Plan Projects
Summary of SWAT Recommendations
Dated September 26,2006
PRIORITY 01 PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS
Project Category and Name Sponsor Requested E Recommend S
Category: Capital Improvement Projects (S shown in millions)
Caldecott Tunnel Project' SWAT $ 62.50 $ 82.50
- 1-680 Carpool Lane Gap Closure(Norris Canyon) 2 SWAT S 25.00 $ 12.50
Category Total: $ 87.50 S 75.00
PRIORITY 92 PROJECT RECOMMENDATIONS
Project Category and Name ($shown in millions) Sponsor Requested$ Recommend S
Category:Major Streets
Town of Danville
- Diablo Road Improvements from Green Valley Road to Avenida Nueva Town of Danville $ 4.02 $ 4.02
Subtotal: $ 4.02 $ 4.02
CIry of Lafayette
• Pleasant Hill Road Corridor Safety Improvements,Phases 3 and 4 City of Lafayette S 0.65 $ 0 65
- Lafayette Safe Routes to School Walkway Projects City o1 Lafayette $ 0.50 S 0 50
• EBMUD Aqueduct Multi-Purpose Path(Downtown) City of Lafayette $ 0.50 $ 0.50
ESMUD/Cattrans ROW Multi-Purpose Path City of Lafayette $ 0.50 $ 0.50
- Buckeye Fields to Lafayette-Moraga Trail Connector City of Lafayette $ 035 S 035
- BART Downtown Satellite Parking and Circulator Facilities City of Lafayette $ 0.12 $ 0.12
Subtotal: $ 262 $ 2.62
Town of Moraga
- Moraga Road Traffic Calming and Pedestrian Safety Improvements Town of Moraga $ 1.70 $ 1.70
Subtotal: $ 1.70 S 1.70
Clry of Orinda
- Camino Pablo Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 1 City of Orinda $ 0.05 $ 0.05
- Camino Pablo Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 2 Cay of Orinda $ 0.31 $ 0.31
• Camino Pablo Pavement Rehabilitation Phase 3 City of Orinda S 0.53 $ 0.53
• Glorietta Blvd.Reconstruction and Improvement Project City o1 Orinda $ 0.59 $ 0.59
- Miner Road Pedestrian Bridge City of Orinda $ 0.19 $ 0.19
- Camino Pablo Pathway Reconstruction City of Orinda $ 0.22 $ 0.22
Subtotal: $ 1.69 $ 1.89
Clry of San Ramon
- Camino Ramon Transportation Enhancements City of San Ramon $ 2.10 $ 2.10
- Crow Canyon Road(East)Wdening City of San Ramon $ 2.00 $ 2.00
Subtotal: $ 4.10 $ 4.10
Contra Costa County
- Camino Tassajara Shoulder and Road Widening CCC PWD $ 3.90 $ 3.90
Subtotal. $ 3.90 $ 3.90
Category Total: $ 18.23 S 18.23
Project Category and Name (S shown in millions) Sponsor Requested$ Recommend$
Category: BART Parking,Access and Other Improvements
- Lafayette BART Station Access Improvements City of Lafayette E 1.50 $ 1 50
Category Total: $ 1.50 8 1.50
NOTES:
i 6F7 SM 65-1 afri t- 67Mee or�9;.Wthe C.tl .1-rank ea•agee.
] IiRnrGMm�Ne675M eIe7tViorinMelarfJ Fa le-t- SM n the E4iveX**16WATY k2l purr IWne nniY4rry1175M-62 SM-612.51.
y- A 8 1
September 29, 2004
SWAT
Attachment B
VA g - t�
.S' WA T
Danville Lafayette Momp Orinda San Ramon&the County of Contra Costa
�'P�.I770N CO
September 29,2006
Robert K. McCleary
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 100
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
Dear Mr. McCleary:
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments to the Measure 1 Growth
Management Program (GMP) Ordinance 06.04. At its September 25, 2006 scheduled meeting,
SWAT discussed the proposed amendments at length and would like to pass along comments related
to Ordinance 06-04,Conditions of Compliance Item 9. As proposed,the condition would read:
9. Submittal of an annexation request by a local jurisdiction to LAFCO outside an
applicable voter approved ULL will constitute non-compliance with the new Measure
J Growth Management Plan.
SWAT understands that the recent request to insert the new language shown in italics was based on a
desire to clarify that a third party submittal for annexation, presumably without the support of the
affected jurisdiction, would not place the subject jurisdiction in non-compliance with the Measure J
GMP. SWAT members raised concerns that the amended language might permit a situation where a
jurisdiction could tacitly support a third party request without submitting a formal application to
LAFCO. In the interest of clearly stating the spirit and intent of the GMP, SWAT recommends the
following additional clarifications:
9. Submiffai Initiation or facilitation of an annexation request by a local jurisdiction to
LAFCO outside an applicable voter approved ULL will constitute non-compliance
with the new Measure J Growth Management Plan.
SWAT.appreciates the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's (CCTA) responsiveness to local
concerns and continues to support CCTA's commitment to protecting the public's transportation
investments through growth management.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at(925) 376-2590.
Sincerely,
rchael .M tcal , Chair
Southwest Are Transportation"Committcc
C: SWAT and SWAT TAC
TRANSPAC Transportation Partnership and Cooperation
Clayton, Concord, Martinez, Pleasant Hill,Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County
1407 Oakland Boulevard, Suite 100, Walnut Creek, California 94596-4300(925)407-0351
Mr. Donald P. Freitas, Chair Attachment D October 16, 2006
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
3478 Buskirk Avenue, Suite 100
Pleasant Hill, CA 94523
Dear Chair Freitas:
As requested by the Transportation Authority, TRANSPAC has developed a submission for the
2009-2015 Measure J Strategic Plan. Attached is a list of TRANSPAC's proposed projects by
proposed bond year as well as the required Fact Sheets for projects to be implemented in the 2009-
2015 time frame. Electronic versions of the Fact Sheets will be forwarded to Authority staff.
Please note that 2012 bond funds have been programmed for project development for the Marina
Vista I-680 southbound off ramp, the SR 242/Clayton Road northbound on ramp and a new
interchange at SR 4/Willow Pass Road. Given the possible timing of funding requests and the
programmed amounts for these projects, funds accrued in the I-680/SR4/SR 242 category rather
than bond funds might be available.
TRANSPAC expects that there will be specific project issues to address relative to timing and
financing as the Strategic Plan is developed over the next several months. TRANSPAC is prepared
to work with Authority staff to resolve any issues which may arise.
Although not part of this submission, please note that recommendations have been developed for
Measure J programs. While no bond funds are proposed for use, TRANSPAC anticipates that its
Measure J funds for Transportation for Livable Communities program as well as its Pedestrian,
Bicycle and Trail Facilities funds will accrue for three years prior to implementation of a
programming process, allocation and expenditure. The first three years of the category accrual for
the Central County School Access Program ($1.2 million) will be accumulated and programmed by
TRANSPAC for school sidewalk/bicycle gap closure capital projects. After the first three years,
these funds are to be allocated annually to the TRANSPAC Transportation Demand Management
Program for School Access Program implementation in Central County.
TRANSPAC looks forward to continuing to work with the Authority on the development of this
important step in the implementation of Measure J. Please do not hesitate to contact the
TRANSPAC Manager or local project sponsors if you require additional information.
Sincerely,
William Shinn
Chair
cc: TRANSPAC Representatives
Bob McCleary, Paul Maxwell, Hisham Noeimi, CCTA
TRANSPAC TAC
Attachment
Measure 1 Strategic Plan TRS submission 10 16 06.doc L4.�-
/�
i
I I Q Iccr o cu
cl
L
vias — '
I I 0 a fa N c
%b MIU c ° I
8 1pa La° o
I I N ry C C C u C � � •p �' N
c�I z Ln EEEco
aaY I
m m m cl
7 ,0 f x N4R "'� > U
OW. fu
IbFl-
p IIS ° II II oa wwz
� O02. 3 �
^ —
N
+ o` o` a` o[ ° 2 F- 40. 0. + + + -
CL
N
Ofl � Y401, O O o MM dl
OC N u ppC ^ a% m i
IV In Ln
O C � I IMNG0010 t° M O �
14 N $ .i ni IA M .r N GD r4 46
rl N N OD
rl
CL
W
I� °1 ' 401,
I^ NsC g
N N O
y O o C N 1 fl O C $ a M $a CD O O N
Nm
1N0 N N r^ M ao O W P, 0) MO a W) r. a I a
ul a
t` a
~ E E
0 CL
f3 12
a N IU O Z � 1 d C c_ C 0 c
—o � � �o - g
c CL C H m > u C a°. c u a 3 N m aTi A N 9
7 �Iq� aGa = a � E = ctn 94
o�Ca14
�4 � 2 :� aiav > doi-
1Aoc r_ > ° �_ $ c� d U) u o $ dlg YoC � a 'R= Laucouj 2
$ C 0o ° cU o°r� t- pt2d� v Y yE � g €
1�Q 10 10 N ICON y 4c A N C v o 7 N t O O
(� f M .: N � NIA w m f 1: a: as heZcoU a49 1I1 N .0
Attachment E
TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX EXPENDITURE PLAN
Table of Expenditure Plan Allocations
Distribution of Funding By Subregion
F(a)
ntral West Southwest East
$millions % (b) (c) (d)
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS '
• } 'low'.
` :• »�_ :Iss-`F .E, »" nnII 3 s,�••a'n,,.,,�:»t:,`y`yi:Y'":: ^`'Y:n<.;�„:x :>:Aiii":,.
<=SFS 1. •�.: ..:.. :e":" i=.:'".= ,�'.:`�'.,."- ..y.....::}=,�'s=::sx.„��•..�"�.,.,.''a�',�„"-°"''•,,x;.^;-i:::'ts:::iwN:i:;`::�'l.r'�,s„ �:
�S="1}fi.�.. :.,t�l'. ��' .,�� ::::'�.,��•.,..:�::t�:::�. .e..::ifY.....� �.� J.��if S'::=�'`�r^'Ys"rP.:€i:..:.:x
,.y,. t'
»:»»» a ».rm+ ..^'.�^^"^"i'RAiue';;3'G. > a'.Eff:�•s:s..:..;.,�'!w?n .. "ii»,:,b."••".•lt:. Fm�3e+ss W.'.a..iL...+.:nw.,..
2 BART-East Contra Costa Rail Extension 150 7.5% _ 150.0
�. ..; :.K.,.. .^^,g,:,-»csss„:u,.w+...•,„•••••:rntnssF:e;;E:.. }334+3rY+.3F. ,>,€mss ,", qy,»,r
..mow.-ma",.:ax?'.Y.....,,,...•.:F
-. f+•• 3C.i ': £:: ,•,=3 SiK:` 55541::::„_.'�':.a.t....=3�j^
:s3.: ii:: -.:. x?! ..;tFi n.. :__::::::?�jj''W>a::f ^%:"ys"Ws=::t........ }}"c�'^"^.'^p`E•F..s c•:''rei.'•t
:,�_..;,,.�.2�� ..=fib„ g :: � 7�5 Q:»
...> .««;,«�......_c�"»;s�,:x; -_nom_.,, ..,. .':a�rimi3s.i """''.` ia' s £sa�t '�"«ii€"J:i:sSa
4 Capitol Corridor Improvements Including Rail 15 0.8% 7.5 7.5
Stations at Hercules and Martinez
r....;... ..... 1:.,
.. � SF"�. :?:.Fee=}a°rli� ;'
Em
». ... ,ar�.t}?}}} m-„ ,3;-':�}r :•u;..•.:
`�, r '7 :::£::?=fs}•;=, tY�A", 3
}: yga„ .�. ".. }>:F:l�c:i�lF€:===i �!•.`': �d:€€»- €€ ,;; N££�' �.& FF R^ r+r.r�
., .,. ??p.lm � MEL"'
�YSSm:.::.^�.:
sexFa� «,« »,.• :, ,,, iiiii i..:sa:,..i3•`i `# 3� 3 €P
3:�»nsr;:r'° 'F>x���i<�S .Li , , :€«a�.a?a. ?=�lFll;k:,€�?.�.�`.�Ifiis:i €€€tii�u�a-2
6 Interchange Improvements on 1-680&State Route 36 1.8% 36.0
242
c � „ .,,,.�, „s^> ..�.•„ �...: ....... .........t. ... ..r... �• ii;�`.w','dc'.:: ...xF=e313:: °f:':s3::Eii %ii :«FF!�!'.::
... .;. .f7�... �•�..,�.. -r,:mg-:_:c .:c».....,.;.... }(Fr�£F=F 3 .F ?}}, 1 s. M::� t...���'L•�.?•i}:C%';Fs:?;i��:%T?!�."!r."•s�'i:::�"r
3. ....... .. :sr.... _-, s';,'•,�,�`.- .......3.?t3`££i':3�3 tA�••;=;?•,� •��i sit. '�Ii:=.:«<i.•%�,}u- >5 �=���5,� 3.,.
=x .;„._. ..,...„.. ...�•t.. ,��a=s^'•.:...., wFF't i3,..,�,''.•:,•. 9..??3€ 'Fls`'3 E 1
r
'F'�a«'£ ^.�;xa«::;`;:�.;,»»r»..Y.�....�E£'�i,.vu»'»"»3,._' •= }ai}i�:.a:gw,'.......•.ett::aiiiEe'.? ...,:�zT�,i;%>�.«���F:.:�.€x< , �€€�J,S9�1�3�„€€3#€ :•;ii-s
8 1-680 Carpool Lane Gap Closure/Transit Corridor 100 5.0% 75.0 25.0
Improvements
" ..---+ -�:::.;,.„c„„^_ •::: x.,,.7:?;'� ..:»r..w'-�'::$:»rc. .�, : ,•'�iq " ,a !F==£'£F:; £*:':�' n3N.. ^:a��,�;;e:t,. .�•s,;:°n., -?M.;t
... ... ...:.. w. .. F..�>•,s,.,:.•.-.."x.«,"...::^..... ...w..s,�,..:�.._'-„w,..:_�m:::c-:z.:tev....e;,.»=,.»i'.':,:;:.."c..€.,..t..a....:.t.t.t.t.r..�, x".:f�n::F.�D:..::..dt��:w��Pv,=�' � � �o.1p�. t,=:, '..,�:
"•;a,
SUBTOTAL 691.5 34.6% 181.0 53.5 87.5 369.5
COUNTYWIDE CAPITAL AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAMS
'.i: ,e:.�«eo!:�« .:s::;:x;nx:r.':'•a.,,t�>c"�;;s� �:^..x,-'-' .,tSt:ls .ar+^r:.G(::�H.YI�l?'..ii`'��lffixEaw
xr••
tomes et 3 ::: <:;. ,.....:•.•,:I:I.QF:t=„.:
�m �x« :.. ..� b ......�'S„ f= xa�xr"::,... ._.. twa€ €l;E t=i€31s£::£i£tu;i,t
I I Local Streets Maintenance&Improvements360 18.0% 108.0 82.8 79.2 90.0
'•aa i3 �, ..„� ..may,.:: »',�......... ]�».. x e 1f1 �E i:N x �='li 'EE�•s<,„;�
�•' i �3� ._:.�... .. '>°«'• ,syx_ m m.r-roy«::::i.:� s €hF€IFrF€;�i33� ffff �: `?;!?�i. H`. 3�
{ a.,T :nF:, iE€€€FFi€&' rj:i„5.�✓- "�€€F'�%xF,
E'= -.''r� 1' `>���r. i`'.,•2�fiFi�:.fir._- �'.,..i.,:d .� � " ��V~�;„
a. :".Y.H.._, ......, sa,_..... 3""'r �; .:: _•,:;=•3a„�..=...�=,r,,,,.... ^!� _ s.,.f•F �'� "'F
,d s --`3rd.-�"�- ..._. E.. ,,_==�rh�•'•`-..»'e. ..=max:. ?;�t':��3ae:::::::,•d«"'iso=€:''3s ��ssr��a�.w•.�E�;;l�i�"�;;,., s
...:'� , F = -'-�"'� .. «a _�:.,•��> ... YjM��;.d4?'};3i:sj:r;ry::k::::::::: ••.. .xA}ski `si€;3
,
,i .� .�. =a.:.�ki6E xkSx:j�.��«:m�x3L}":««"� ..:E.a,;.. fy�'i:,,,,_€}'�a°`+:,`, y;".:::^::::•as:ta..�`z_'•�i F.:t {�i Fg gg
13 Pedestrian,Bicycle and Trail Facilities ' 30 1.5% 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
SUBTOTAL 531 26.6% 151.5 124.3 102.7 132.5
OTHER COUNTYWIDE PROGRAMS
•...,
' ''•• tcs..
r 3 ''SYii.il
ERNE.,
� •,�� �-M•'��"' .,i•`. :: 14.:,Ss�.';t,.Sum
';ss ..�, � ^ .j:.�.ee 1I, �,::L�:"Pc . e. .
£- . x• .... �W x.-
• a^a „.
r,>...�..«''.""�.`�';w ._" ..':ftsryc' ::-..",.�.. ��3«r:;;:x _• <F€ ' : `i'_�_'`'`,::: <•m=.'w=�:.,W: >„»ct::c::::.. ,¢. -���,-., Dry
15 Transportation for Seniors&People with 100 5.0% 25.0 35.0 17.0 23.0
Disabilities 4
ill: 5 11
?=S+£'....F•u-ss'.�.tgi £t= .. X+• e(«i ",' �..:'.
yy�� �
a�l4,FiiuiES� _• R«oe � 3..,r&a',«ti i€€iEiEld4tSii€AB�::.i:733""�'a.. »"'� �'^m.""��.«€�t�1.`:''It�,oa'.iGw:»3i:i�E.>,0'p',.
17 Commute Alternatives 20 U 1.0% 5.8 4.8 3.6 5.8
•; ...-.;..?-?��3.«'��€ !�-»: tap'.:: aid:..�°�; £L>;",t �:"t" ?> ay4»;,m;.»�.�;.. ,u1"„ri� =;d+ei�,tt?;�=::;`�»;iit;;a`q!�;sen=-'F t}€1€f€?t'`_�i>:
y _
.,_ ...� Ta.. .,F== ..:._....^:::f3`�..,.=v°:`^':4`d, �3',„ is`i3,'4;•Eas:•s4::.>:!•�• .>I€ }. .::s
;;F � F= ,rm:•«r;=x € =,>.cei >,xi.:€?rz=•itT�"',','...,�:,'�.,,•,.,•,,. a 1..:.::..�:.,, r.'r.=ilii,3°^£?!3 =F Ft =F��iE1,3?s:i.`?.E
SUBTOTAL 366 18.3% 74.8 131.8 55.6 43.8
SUBREGIONAL PROJECTS AND PROGRAMS
°^ i3. 3 . '•--%P.4(E .�}'. Nv;nF�eErq»^:. e�> •: E<'E"r% :::i;�
• , •. .¢" ', .. ...,,,£�,::. �., a�r�_} `Li»• .€F.;; i�`�� � ..�»Fm,:i F
8:5,. •.��'�'� .•�.��MS=:;�:• :�';;�:EF�-�4,.�€3',£<-;3<�
dhY4f5� , ,:�CmE" '•.•mmF�`'�«E'' n3L•'m"ss; •._ll� �`a�� �.�s��.m"`a;;`,;;»`a: 'ru`»` 'S
20 Additional Transportation for Seniors and People 23 1.2% 10.0 13.0
with Disabilities 4
3"»>., .<�,.p ..:.a...s.' «.;;m .. '«tears. .,,...:-«e rsF<£FFa's•€S."";i:'s•"=.ei;::: ::p,::s- •n
, .__. o a- ., p ttSlax: :. a::.: 9,=: ;_`__<_•:: .§ � .,�1�',�3F :,:,;?,_;;;''$K _:::b�==�F`'= :.
Via:=
.: $ .. � ..
tt�u - Q{ �•_ _,e".r. ;._., y,, :7`nom'
.., t,r" .,:53 i��:. 3t•e'ee.=. .++w.'Sr.� ',. "....-..::..«,...,-H�'��'«F .�i° - M:e«:?3.:ca,�.';'�� .";;f£.:x==; .;y. ='t;da;', ?•
p�y��yis;.,'," µ3W 3££�_��€€€€n» f,�
.lY1ifW ,:vim:, r=» �^... .......,4 .,t:�`:..:,.$f : _ ..rc,^E,3e.„, r..;.,.,v '%j •t•F3:: F€:'�`•"F:y°
a:}3t<a-
• ... .• . . ..". „x-^£s e _�;....„F.;.;...�:..... ..... 1f k:":::G�+.-...,.;,"x�:"�„�asz !€r:x.,... .;�€.`°£ 3:.;:z�3 g ..«r,t
4 .oy sf
-::n: �.,-.. ..n"r.2=-'.�...,.,.Ni_�.'+��x,M.c„,�,�"•.">'�»?"" „�ad�F';�?S ."fl 'i� «
"r:�EF:;'. ^.'ts.; �«.»�si,:u :� ,.:�.�.;. ';i4,•'s:€:::s)::.3 E3�:.
'�� 'il, ,.»; ,r.>i°s.., ` �' h•=.^^.t.o,.••ss€�F€as}::ei'j's£:s:ti:. ,:•y
='a`i•.:N,
.=";�t¢. �;,}:aC;s .. M�,:xm'i;:?iu:�:�„i --�•h,_ ,F.:�?€:....£:=?;`r�",, `:ii:��I;:.,..._ ',
'(I' «:------.',.f
,vf�•• fisn%«�..+ia;.s `_ •• „'+•..�i'�'>E.u�ti,2Sb8;;¢�...a�'�' i€�'..::SP,:�53a..ss.it;C€ £3s1€:.EF}iii}i::Gr��:_iA a�l>c:�:::4.x'�y;£
JULY 21, 2004
TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX EXPENDITURE PLAN
Distribution of Funding By Subregion
Central West Southwest East
$millions % (a) (b) (c) (d)
23 Additional Local Streets and Roads Maintenance& 41.8 2.1% 20.0 11.0 10.8
Improvements
25 Additional Transportation for Livable Communities 8 0.4% 8.0
Project Grants 1
27 Capitol Corridor Rail Station Improvements at 2.5 0.1% 2.5
Martinez
ft
SUBTOTAL 391.5 19.6% 130.7 142.8 96.3 21.7
OTHER
fo
"0 33 MW
P
uaN
TOTAL 2,000 100.0%
P- MOW Jwk M�*
Specific Projects and Programs(Total) 1,900 538.0 452.4 342.1 567.5
Population Share(2020 Estimate)of Total I 29.0% 24.0% 18.0% 29.0%
%allocated to Projects and Programs in subregion I 28.3% 23.8% 18.0% 29.9%
%of"Fair Share"of Projects and Programs 97.6% 99.2% 100.0% .103.0%
1: Funding is for both capital improvements and costs incurred to accelerate delivery into the early years of the program
(2009-10 through 2015-16)
2: Actual funding levels will be determined by formula:For 18%Local Street Maintenance and Improvements funds,annually;
for TLC,every three to five years.
3: Pedestrian and bicycle facilities improvements are also eligible to be funded from the Transportation for Livable
Communities Project Grants,Local Streets and Roads Maintenance&Improvements,and Major Streets:Traffic Flow,Safety,
and Capacity Improvements categories.$20 million out of the$30 million to be made available countywide. Remainder($10
million)to be divided by sub-region.
4: Transit Operators are required to set aside up to 3%of their annual allocation as a reserve to offset potential future
revenue downturns.
5: A summary of the Transportation for Livable Communities(TLC)program is included in Part IV.
6: "Total"excludes$20 million for Pedestrian,Bicycle and Trail facilities,$60 million for Congestion Management,
Transportation Planning,Facilities&Services,and$20 million for Administration
JULY 21, 2004
$40
EXHIBIT B
CCTA—Administration &Projects Committee December 7,2006
Subject Status of Applications for Proposition 1B Corridor Mobility
Investment Account (CMIA)Funds
Summary of Issues The Authority adopted its priority list of candidate projects for the CMIA
funds in November. A brief status report and a process summary are
provided below.
Recommendations Not applicable.
Financial Implications The CMIA funding for Northern California is expected to total$1.8 billion
over the next ten years, less the cost of issuance of the bonds. The
Authority's top tier of project requests totals$260 million,while the second
tier totals$148.7 million, including$30 million Contra Costa's share of a
joint Alameda-Contra Costa corridor management project on 1-80 submitted
by the Alameda CMA,which the Authority has endorsed.
Options Not Applicable.
Attachments A. Summary of CMIA Project Requests and Matching Funding
B. SAFTEA-LU Federal Earmarks for Contra Costa Projects
Changes from
Committee
Background
CMIA Candidate Prolects and Funding Expectations
At the November 15,2006 meeting,the Authority adopted the list of CMIA candidate project funding
requests shown in Attachment A and summarized as:
Tier 1,$260 million:
• Caldecott Tunnel, $175 million;
• Route 4,East widening, Somersville Road to Route 160/Route 4 Bypass, $85 million
Tier 2, $148.7 million(excluding the 1-680 Southbound HOV Lane Extension which lacks a cost
estimate):
I-80 Integrated Corridor Management Project,$30 million(Contra Costa Share; the Authority
endorsed Alameda CMA's application for the two-county project);
• 1-680 Auxiliary Lane, Sycamore to Crow Canyon Road,$27 million;
• I-680/Route 4 Interchange,Direct Connector from Northbound I-680 to Westbound Route 4,$50
million;
• I-680 Northbound HOV Lane Extension,North Main to Route 242,New Estimate at$21 million;
• I-680 Southbound HOV Lane Extension,North Main to Livorna(cost not yet identified); and
• Vasco Road Improvements, $20.7 million.
The statutes require the California Transportation Commission(CTC)to adopt its initial list of projects
for CMIA funding no later than March 1,2007,and allows the CTC to periodically update that list. The
CTC has indicated that it will probably commit only a portion of the CMIA funding in this cycle,with an
\\Cctasvr\common\04-APC Packets\2006\12-07-06\12-CMIA Status.doc 12-1
CCTA—Administration &Projects Committee December 7,2006
update(and probable expansion)timed to coincide with the 2008 STIP(April 2008)and possibly the
2010 STIP (April 2010). Under the statutes(Section 8879.20 et seq. of the Government Code),the
projects selected for funding from the CMIA portion of the bonds are expected to be able to". . .
commence construction or implementation no later than December 31, 2012."(Section 8879.23
(a)(6)(B)).
Staff believes that the Bay Area is likely to receive between$900 million and$1.4 billion in CMIA
funding out of the$1.8 billion(less costs of issuance)available in Northern California. While the Bay
Area has,according to MTC,approximately 86 percent of the congestion in Northern California, it
represents just over one-half of the population of that area. The CTC has a"high"target of$879 million
for the Bay Area,but has noted that a region is not bound by its target when it submits project requests for
funding. The Bay Area CMAs,working with MTC,are attempting to come to consensus on a combined
list of requests that would total $1.4 to $2 billion,with the higher amount probably needed to achieve
consensus within the region on a consolidated list.
Contra Costa is approximately 15 percent of the Bay Area's congestion and has a similar percentage of
Bay Area population. If the CTC were to approve Contra Costa's$260 million Tier 1 funding request,
that would represent a significant recognition of our congestion problems, the readiness of our projects,
and the Authority's on-going commitment to improve state highway corridors.
The schedule for the remaining initial process is as follows:
• December 1,2006: Formal submittal of CMIA candidate projects by the CMAs to MTC;
• December 20,2006: Approval of a"Circulation Draft"of a combined Bay Area CMIA list by
MTC;
• January 15, 2007: Submittal of a Final Bay Area CMIA list by MTC to the CTC; and
• February 28,2007:Adoption of Initial CMIA Project Commitments by the CTC.
Other FundinS Opportunities
During the discussion of CMIA project funding priorities,staff was asked to provide information
regarding future funding opportunities to accomplish the projects on the CMIA list that might not receive
CMIA funding. Based on current statutes and federal authorization precedents, there are three main
potential sources of funds that could be tapped:
• State Transportation Improvement Proeram(STIP). The STIP is comprised of both state and
federal funds that flow through the state's traditional funding process. Under existing statutes,
each county is entitled to a"county share"of the total revenues available in each four-year
period,determined by its share of population and centerline state highway miles as fractions of
the north or south county group totals. Contra Costa's share is approximately 1.75 percent of
total revenues,which—under"normal"circumstances—tends to range from$17 to$35 million
per year. Under existing statutes and process,the CMAs propose the projects to be funded from
STIP funds,but MTC has the final say on what is submitted to the CTC. Under SB 45 (Statutes
of 1997),the CTC must either approve all the project proposals submitted by MTC,or reject the
submittal in its entirety.
Proposition 1B also includes a one-time STIP augmentation. Between carryover funds and
Contra Costa's share of the$2 billion augmentation,our total target for this mid-2007
augmentation is$77 million,of which$62 million is our"share"for highway expenditures.
However,of that total, financial plans for Route 4,east and the Caldecott assume$15 million and
\\Cctasvr\common\04-APC Packets\2006\1 2-07-06\1 2-CMIA Status.doc 12-2
CCTA—Administration &Projects Committee December 7,2006
$29 million for the Caldecott,which were proposed but not included in the 2006 STIP due to fund
type constraints that left the capacity"unprogrammed"at that time.
Staff notes that,under the policies adopted by MTC in 2005 as part of its 30-year Regional
Transportation Plan(RTP),the Authority's actual flexibility could be constrained to only 64
percent of its county share, since MTC treated the county share funds as"flexible"funds, and the
other 36 percent is theoretically committed to help address the local streets and roads and transit
capital shortfalls.
• Special Federal Earmarks. Every six years,Congress is faced with the task of renewing the
Federal Surface Transportation Program,which has become a nearly$400 billion authorization.
As part of the renewal,in the most recent cycles Congress has significantly expanded the
"earmarks" included for highway projects,with the last bill—"SAFETEA-LU"—containing
approximately 6000 such line items. For Contra Costa, earmarks included$36 million for Route
4, east, $14 million for the study and construction of Route 239(Byron Highway corridor),$5.8
million for Camino Tassajara improvements,and other commitments as shown in Attachment B.
The next renewal is scheduled for 2009,and earmarks are likely to continue to be part of the
process, despite concerns raised by a number of parties regarding the number and costs of the
earmarks in SAFETEA-LU.
• Federal"Regional"Surface Transportation Proeram(RSTP)Funds Flowing Through
MTC. With the passage of"ISTEA"in 1991,programs for funds that historically flowed
through the state to cities and counties—principally Federal Aid Urban(FAU) funds—were
ended,and a new category of funding was created—the RSTP funds. These flow through MTC.
The RSTP funds,along with other funds under MTC's direction,have been used to support—in
whole or in part—a number of new MTC initiatives such as the TLC program,the"T+"program,
support for the CMAs planning efforts, as well as partial funding of the capital shortfalls for local
streets and roads and for transit. In theory, these funds are flexible and could be alternatively
used for major capital projects. However,even if some of MTC's newer programs were ended,
the magnitude of the unmet capital shortfall needs for local streets and roads,and for transit,
make this an unlikely source of funds,with narrow exceptions such as focused capital operational
improvements,etc.
Other potential sources include:
• Future toll bridge revenue increases for those projects that would have a direct,beneficial impact
on traffic on one or more of the bridges serving Contra Costa;
• Subsequent state bond measures or other targeted revenue increases; and/or
• A regional fuel tax or other mechanism.
\\Cctasvr\common\04-APC Packets\2006\12-07-06\12-CMIA Status.doc 12-3
„a n A� L -t Attachment A
::.. . : NW d ro
t, Q
Co
Mr-
0.
O O 0 0 0 O U
,.. CD Q _
tt i- w 10 O N 10 0 N O Co
C l N a O CV
C
•xx:^*'M4 � •rats=
i O 00 CD 0 00O O 0 0 O
.n o ui o
N M b
t K'
Via'K� fi p{
•s W' W W w 69 W 44 1613,601,
401,
R O
O Lni0p r r-- NA N
Cli CN7 A fh Y Co N N N aO
yy A •9�i
O X13 ,.�::�;.� •
V
t” Co
40�;x(17.;8l1OJ�7 3 ' Z to Q Q V
h t $r o o f o c rnsoh"
!• 1w ou q
k �x` .. � d ro oCx d m ro e 0.
a Q to 1= U C
CL 9 M ," • Co O C O 00 p) O Co .O
w 0 '.,4. o o qCl
d
a� u6 , iuR� o cc ro = d Co d
CLa
n rn N i, rn n rn .1P,
i q 9 q p
r Na �.':' c Q c b a 6
= V Q
ter,.:.:�::•;...,.. CO LL no
Co C'j Co
q L
4 4 q 4 C €
xs ri. d �Q ro = = t
<.: a:. d =
tM
lepuo 21Si1CL CxCL Q
c
~ E E q E E qo
C c u Co o
r N
K4...Po, •`'^. •',... e N N N N N N N a W
re' 4 = Co
Fvsi., E V c a v
�c�, ..ryy: m o o d E ro
ro 3 c o c v oc
IMZ` ='to >E > E ca in
z � > U a � d`oc � � m0 m z Go
o °�
E o co O Z •N N f/� N ro O
� vvE o Go Co 4) c
�r. rot o CO 0 > romr � ro 'Sc d
.'.,"`•` :}'k' s+ ���c.� U to W _ y U _a W to> w J �. o
dJ00 Co o
Co (O t0 f00 f00 r C N
/ 2- -4
Attachment B
FEDERAL EARMARKS FOR CONTRA COSTA PROJECTS IN SAFETEA-LU
National Highway Bus and
Corridor Projects- Bus Transports
Infrastructure High Facilities- tion
Improvement Priority High Priority Improvem
Project Sponsor No. Program No. Projects No. Projects No. ents
..........
.....................
........ ... ................ ........... ........
.......... ... ........
...................
..............
...................... ........ ..............
......... ....... .... .. . .... .
......... ...........
......... .......... ...........
.......... .....
. . .... ........
........ .. ..........
.......... .......................
......... ..... ....
SR�41164 Upgrade
rom .....:::::::::ii. ............
.. ...............
33 000 0
.. . ...................... . ..... ............................
County ...................... ................................. .......... .......
.............. ........ . ............
... ..... ......
costal..... ........ .....
C.TA1::
... . .. ............ . .......... ................... ........ ....
00
.. ...... .... .......... ... ................. .........
. ..... .. .. ........... .........
............................ ................. ........
.. . .. ............
...... ... .... .......
........ .....
............. ................. . 1 ....... .. ....... .........
........... ............. .................... . :. J
.......... ......
.... ... ....... . 600,06
Ul$grade and;extenommerce-Avenue,City.of C6w.00Concord: . . .... ..... .....
.............. . ........... . ................... ............ ...........
.. ................ .. -:.:. . ....
.... .............. . ......
fiat';:::.:::
.... ................
and ..........
...................... ... ..........
............. ..........
..........
...... .........
S. lntbmhWfdiAdKSB thaMo4fif6h 4i 1466&Eq� lmpiarpentsdwb�
...............................
.... ......... ..........
............ ... .........
d.!'
... .... ......
.. ........... . .... .... . .... ............ ......... ................ .......... . .. .......
........... ..... .. ... ................ .
. .. ....... ..............
..... .....
.:::.::::: :.................... .......
...................
..... ..... .. .... .. .
on lik ttudk'.'"f.
,&'d6hgtruct23:CA S
R 91rdinSWW cdntia Cos'ts'::"::
re i!eaAol7205AqjTra'
��n:ty -:::.:4i060.000 e::::;_ . ...... . 46,4 :10.000,000
............ .... ..... ............ ..........................................
..........
..........
.... .........
..........
................. ... ....... . ...........
............. ........
........... . .........
..................�&Taii . .................. .......
........ .........
bes..911; cons don.Canilv Alirabrii�.Canyon:. . .. ...
............. ........... ...................... ........ .. ....
. . ............ ..............
..........
....... ............................
................... ...... ......
tozast.To �Pr "a I b bpq 0
.016 t' 11 .. . )Ile::!:: 8 0.0. 5,000t000
...;-:x....� nv o . ...... ...
Al - I..................
.. ............
.. ........ ..... .......... .... .. I ..
. . .: .:.: .... . . P�
... .............. P, .:.:.�t ..........
I...... .... .. ......
. ..........................
.............I...... .. .... :.. ... .....
.... ....... ..... .......
...............
...... ... . ...
Vasco Rd Safety-Amprovements.:C&AWthe Count .: ::::::: ....... ...... .. ..........
ydf,.� ... ... ......... .... ......
Alameda Public Wotkj�California2669 ;800 000 . .. ...
. .. ... . ... .........
............. . .... ................................ ........
................
.. .....................
. ...........
.................
. ..................
.....................
. . ... ............................. ......
4oUrth&&'6fC6I66dftx6 .......
.... ............. . ......
.......... ...... ...... ........ .... ..
.1. ................
COTA.� 11369 illiiifl
r.. .... .......
o
...... ........
........... .............. ... ... . ......
....... .. .........
... .. ......
ssii:i: .. . ... .. . I... ...... ......... ...
. ......... . .... ... ..... ...
biking trallimith EBRPQ��Conth
. ..... ................... .......
T............ .....
......... ......
....... ..... .
nty� .2840: 80.0.000
Car'Oo5u Odii 6. .s:!?�I": ,::::::: - . .
........ ......
...............
......... ..... ............
. . .........
;: . . . .. ............
. ..... ............... .. ... ...::.:. .
.................. ...........
........... .............
....................... .............. .. .......
.........................
................ .......... ........... ................................ ....... .... .......
.......... ........... ........... .... ... ..... .... ................................. ...
.................
. .......... ......................
0.
....... 4856 0:00
R6611 . PRI4.4i in thiti, oi:W W- OW. ..........
.9y;
. ......... ....................... ....... .
g . .................. .... .........
........... . ....... .....
........ is
ConstNct b1cypler&p6dostriAn trail......ii6tweefi Poit Costiv ........... .........
... ..........4 ...... ... ............
..................... , ..... " ........................
..........................
........M klnezaspi�ofthe.$0mFrqqsIcsb Bay!Trall,:Cdn!tPo*aCosts..
County ... ... .........................
...
7.79 .............. ... . ..................e.. e
.......
. ...............................................
.........................
..............................
......
.......
............
:.......... ... ..
ftaspfiMill:
delDa:.:...g.:.:i.:V..a
.i.Ie..Y....:b.....@........e.......e....B..
.0
.s...:::..;0...::: ......
... .:....�.. .�......:.....:.:.....:......:.
.:...
............::.:.:.
.... :............�.:.:.:.:.....:...
....i.
..... .. ... . ...........
Ira s.t
C .125....................
..............
::.
. . :
...............
...
.. . ....................... .:i ............
...... ......................
. . ... . .. ......... .....
. ................
�aftlne4CMhtermqdal� ac itykes ................. .....
*416k� .. Mattinsi .1'254'000 :::::' 'i:':::::::'. .
............ ii.�:........ . ..... .... i
.................... ...........
.............................
..................... . .......
............... ......
............. aq. . ................ ..................................
................ .....
..........
.......... .... .
.. ..................................
. ... ....... .... .
... .......... ..... . .............
Lm.
.................... ......... ...... .... ..
0
Ric rn CA.BA T1 S N ..........
.1I ............................................
Richmond',
................. ....
J ............. . ...... .... ...... .............
............. ..... .......................
.............. ........... .......... ...... .....
...............
... ................ i.::::::: X
.......... ............
ii..0 I t rhod 1 4 StA
1-166,-Ulle A:60 11' l6h Ini*01*11W: HeMUII�s,:
.. ........
..........
. ............................
...............
.......................... .......
............ ..................
............
....... .........
. .................
....... ..........
:::.::.::::............ . . ............. 20606A 0 00
0Q
................... .......... 2 4z !,�:i!ji� ii�14'999'9
. ..............
q:!.-............
........ ...........
.............
................................. ........... .... ...... ...............
Sum of all sources. $74,262,000