HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06251985 - 1.101 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS. DIRECTOR
DATE: June 25, 1985
SUBJECT: Caldecott Tunnel and Benicia Bridge: Prohibition of Lane Changes
Response to Board Referrals of March 26, 1985 and April 16, 1985
Specific Requests or Recommendations & Background Justification
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
None
II. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
None
III. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND:
At the March 26, 1985 Board of Supervisors meeting Supervisor McPeak inquired as to
why the recommendation of the Caldecott Tunnel Iask Force regarding prohibition of,
lane changes within the tunnel had not been implemented, and why a similar prohibition
on lane changes should not be implemented on the Benicia Bridge in an effort to
reduce accidents. By memo of April 2, 1985 the Public Works Director--having been a
member of both the Contra Costa County Task Force and the Task Force set up in
Sacramento, headed by Adriana Gianturco--responded to Supervisor McPeak that he had
been unaware of any such recommendation. The Task Forces' final reports and meeting
records were reviewed and it was found there had been no recommendation or discussion
regarding prohibition of lane changes. The correspondence also advised that Caltrans
had been contacted and they had indicated an unwillingness to prohibit lane changes
due to an absence of the type accidents which could be prevented by prohibition of
lane changes. (The Caldecott Tunnel accident occurred when an empty bus, traveling at
high speed, came upon a slow moving fuel tanker in the right lane and a parked car in
the left lane, and had nowhere to go to avoid the accident. A prohibition of lane
change would have had no effect on the occurrence of that accident. )
On April 16, the Board of Supervisors upon recommendation .of Supervisor McPeak, asked
that the Public Works Director direct a letter to the District Director for Caltrans
requesting that Caltrans take appropriate action to prohibit lane change maneuvers
within the Caldecott Tunnel and on the Benicia Bridge, which was done. Caltrans
responded on May 29, indicating they decline to prohibit lane changes for several
reasons, primarily because there has been no significant record of accidents due to
lane changes and a prohibition to passing would be difficult to orce and would
cause an even greater backup of traffic that currently occurs t s two acilities.
Continued on attachment: yes Signature-
Recommendation of County Administrator Recommend ion o Boa Committee
Approve Other:
Signature(s):
Action of Board on: June 25 , 1985 Approved as Recommended Other x
The Board acknowledged receipt of the above report.
Vote of,Supervisors I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
X Unanimous (Absent AND ENTERED ON THE -MINUTES OF THE
Ayes: Noes: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN.
Absent: Abstain:
Attested June 2 5 , 1985
Orig'r. : Public Works Director Phil Batchelor
cc: County Administrator Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
and County Administrator
bo:jmw.25.t6 By a
:djh Depu y
Cl k