HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02091988 - S.8 f �• p
3. � BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Supervisor Robert I . Schroder Contra
District III (\„S♦1.a
DATE:
Introduced February 2, 1988 for County
Board Action on February 9 , 1988 49
SUBJECT: Southern Pacific Right-of-Way Policy Statement
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDED ACTION
ADOPT a joint Policy Statement on the Southern Pacific Right
of Way by Contra Costa County, Town of Danville and City of San Ramon
(Rudgear Road to Alameda County Line) , as follows:
1 . Southern Pacific Right of Way shall be used as a non-
motorized transportation route and underground utility
corridor from Rudgear Road south to the Contra Costa
County/Alameda County line;
2 . Request CALTRANS and/or Metropolitan Transportation
Commissionito study transportation options on the I-680
freeway right-of-way; and
3 . The Southern Pacific Right of Way shall remain in public
ownership along its entire route and not be sold, leased
or broken.
i
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON February 9, 1988 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
The Board also ADOPTED the attached position on the Southern Pacific Right of Way in
Contra Costa County, as recommended by Supervisor Sunne McPeak.
Supervisor Powers stated that .he was riot familiar with the issues and therefore ABSTAINED.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT; ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AYES: II,IV,V,IIAOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: I AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS
ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: Community Development ATTESTED
Town of Danville f Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of —?
City of San Ramon L__ $u9@1* 1k4PdcounlYAdministrete[
County Administrator
M382/7-88 BY ' 'DEPUTY
47
OUTLINE OF POSITION ON SOUTHERN PACIFIC
RIGHT OF WAY IN CONTRA COSTA COUN'T'Y
I
The 19-mile Southern Pacific Right of Way (SP ROW) in
Contra Costa' County is a valuable asset in our community
which should be used for future use. Nowhere else is
there left in our county as long a contiguous strip of
land that links together several communities as this
ROW. It has the potential to be used for trails,
linear parkways, or as a transportation component in
selected areas.
The Board of Supervisors has taken important steps to
preserve the SP ROW by coordinating a strategic plan
with the cities and purchasing the ROW. The county has
contributed 3/5ths of the purchase dollars from local
sources and the state has contributed the balance of
funds.
The future uses of the SP ROW must be determined
through cooperative planning with the cities, citizens
and commercial users along the ROW.
Although light rail service in the San Ramon Valley
between Walnut Creek and Dublin is being discussed and
considered for the future, the feasibility of
generating enough demand to justify the costs has not
yet been demonstrated. Express busways or simply
increased bus service appears to be more cost effective
public transit at this time.
If light rail service is ever to be cost effective
and feasible in the San Ramon Valley, it would be
preferable to use an alignment other than the SP ROW.
The number of grade crossings and proximity to
residential areas presents major problems for the use
of the SP ROW for light rail.
An alternative alignment for light rail (or an express
busway) along I-680 between Rudgear Road and Bishop
Ranch should be studied by CalTrans.
The Board of Supervisors should work with the cities
and citizen groups to identify sources of revenue to
reimburse Contra Costa County and the State for those
portions of the ROW that may not be used for public
transit but designated for park or trail use
exclusively. Replacement or repurchase revenues would
allow the county to acquire substitute ROW along 1680
if feasible. Possible sources of replacement revenues
may include a future 1/2 cent sales tax measure, park
bond proceeds, or a special bond measure.
i
I
I
The SP ROW �in the immediate vicinity of the Pleasant
Hill BART station should continue to be used ultimately
for transportation express access as designated in the
adopted Specific Plan for the area.
A possible light rail link between Bishop Ranch in
Contra Costa County and the Hacienda Business Park in
Alameda County should be studied for feasibility. This
may be the most cost effective section of the San Ramon
Valley corridor for light rail. If the SP ROW is not
acceptable to the cities for light rail use in this
area, then a substitute ROW purchase plan should be
developed.
Sunne Wright McPeak
January 28, 1988
j'
-2-