Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04081986 - X.13 TO: BOARD 'OF SUPERVISORS FROM: Supervisor .Tom Powers Contra Costa DATE: April 8, 1986 County SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES STUDY FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION Recommendation: We should work with the transit agencies in Contra Costa County to develop the scope and funding for a .Transit Alternatives Analysis ,in Contra Costa County. Contra Costa County should act as the lead agency for this study and consider identifying some funding for its completion. This item should be referred to the Finance Committee for return report and monitoring. Background: In connection with the East County BART extension, an Alternatives Analysis is being done which does not include the examination of a light rail alternative in Contra Costa County. . There isoconcern by members of our transportation staff that the results of this Alternatives Analysis will not demonstrate a cost effective ridership program and therefore, the East County BART extension may be in jeopardy. I UMTA (Urban Mass Transit Administration) has funded this Alternatives Analysis yet funding has not been identified for a Contra Costa light rail alternative. Numerous concerns have been expressed by citizens of the county that they will never see a BART extension to East County or any part of the county during their life time. Therefore, a careful evaluation of light rail alternatives is imperative. Contra Costa County may be fortunate enough to have light rail available, in the near future as a result of the partial abandonment of the Santa Fe Railway if the Southern Pacific and Santa Fe 'Railroad Companies" merge as a result of a recent proposal., In addition, the San Ramon branch line may be available for a light rail system. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON AT>ril 8, 1986 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X i Also REFERRED the proposal to the Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (CCTAC) for review. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE I AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Finance Committee ATTESTED AA--A.G.Q. & X98 CCTAC Phil Batchelor, Clerk-of the Board of County Administrator Supervisors and County Administrator M302/7-98 BY DEPUTY 2 In order to provide for contingencies and for examining all of the transit alternatives in Contra Costa, it becomes imperative that the Alternatives Analysis for the East County BART extensionbe expanded to include these light rail alternatives. Apparently! , the federal government, who has funded this Alternatives Analysis, is not willing to expand it without substantial reexamination and delay. In addition, other funding for this element of the Alternatives Analysis has not yet been identified. Interest has been expressed by members of this board and by citizens and elected officials throughout the county to examine light rail alternatives and, therefore, it seems appropriate to identify a source of funding to expand the Alternatives Analysis to include light rail. Results If No Action Taken: An apparent lack of examination of appropriate light rail alternatives.