Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06081993 - TC.1 Contra Costa TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County T % FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DATE: June 8, 1993 SUBJECT: Report on draft California Transportation Plan and the draft Regional Transportation Plan. SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Authorize the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to sign letters commenting on the draft California Transportation. Plan and the draft Regional Transportation Plan. FISCAL IMPACT None. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The California Department of Transportation is preparing a California Transportation Plan to comply with the provisions of SB 1435 and the federal Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, known as ISTEA. A draft Policy Element was released in February, to be followed by a Strategy Element and a Recommendations Element. Concurrently, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is preparing a major update of the Regional Transportation Plan and has also released a draft Policy Element. Coming at a time of major change, these two documents will influence transportation investment decisions for the next 20 years. Measure C and Proposition 111 have established a major role for local agencies in transportation planning and decision-making, and ISTEA has introduced new flexibility in the allocation of federal transportation funds. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : Tom Powers Gayle Bishop ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT _ TRUE ANY CERTIFY THAT I3 D CORRECT COPY OF AN A AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Orig Dept: Community Development ATTESTED Contact: Ernest Vovakis, 646-2131 PHIL BATCHE R, CLERK OF cc: CalTrans (via CDD) THE BOARD OF-SUPERVISORS MTC (via CDD) AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY - --e , DEPUTY California Transportation Plan/Regional Transportation Plan June 8 , 1993 Page 2 In reviewing these documents, the Committee's major concerns can be summarized as follows: 1. The plans do not provide a clear sense of direction for California' s future transportation system. Rather, they seem to offer all things to all people. There is no clear message that resources are limited and that choices must be made. The danger is that a policy framework will be constructed that could rationalize virtually any funding decision. 2 . Transportation planning is a subset of a larger planning scheme that encompasses land use, infrastructure, open space and resource protection. However, the relationship of the state plan to broader planning objectives at the state level or to regional transportation plans and congestion management plans is not clear. MTC recognizes the need for a regional land use plan which will be supported by transportation planning. However, MTC proposes to work with congestion management agencies to improve coordination of land use and transportation planning. CMA's do not have a direct role in land use planning. 3 . The plans should include a separate goal on promotion of technology and policies that eliminate the need for trips. Technological developments are rapidly changing traditional methods of working and transacting business. Use of personal computers and modems at home eliminates the need for work trips. 4 . The institutional requirements for achieving improved integration of state, regional, and local land use and transportation planning need to be specified. The state should define a process for identifying issues of statewide significance (such as intercity rail planning) and achieving concensus on them. The Committee has prepared letters for the Chair's signature, expressing these concerns. The- Board of Supervisors. Contra ClerPhkl fthehBoard Costa and County Administration Building County Administrator ti 651 Pine St., Room 106 (510)646-2371 Martinez, California 94553-1290 County Tom Powers,1st District Jeff Smith,2nd District Gayle Bishop,3rd District ��..•s•...L•.,p� Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District Tom Torlakson,5th District \' June 8, 1993 a coun'�' Lawrence D. Dahms, Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, CA 94607-4700 Dear Mr. Dahms: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the draft Policy Element of the Regional Trazisportation Plan dated March 2, 1993, and we would like to offer %he following comments for your consideration. we realize that the Policy Element is the first component of a larger document which is under development. However, we feel that this element sets the tone for the whole effort, and we request that our comments be considered in the context of the overall project. 1. In general, the goals and c:,)jectives are very broad. The Policy Element Chart, identifying linkages between goal, objectives, and strategies is interesting, but it is not clear how it will be used to guide funding decisions. Our concern is that a policy framework will be constructed that could rationalize virtually any funding decision. This section should set the stage for meaningful analyses of cost- effectiveness of different strategies so that tradeoffs may be identified on a project by project basis. In addition, the relationship of the Regional Transportation Plan to the California Transportation Plan should be specified. The linkages between air quality and transportation need greater emphasis. Finally, the Regional Transportation Plan should be based upon an agreed-upon vision of the future Bay Area. 2. Objective A is oriented to the supply side of transportation development, providing needed capacity. The Policy Element should also support measures on the demand side including those that eliminate the need for trips. Technology is rapidly changing traditional methods of working and transacting business through use of personal computers and modems at home or at remote sites. In addition, many local jurisdictions have adopted trip reduction ordinances and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District is requiring large employers to develop trip reduction plans. The cumulative t Lawrence D. Dahms June 8, 1993 Page 2 effect of these programs should be incorporated in the planning for new facilities. 3. Strategy B recognizes the need for a regional land use plan that will guide transportation decision making. MTC should participate in a partnership with appropriate local agencies; however, the congestion management agencies may not be the most appropriate local agencies since they do not have direct responsibility for land use planning. Unless the state changes the structure for providing local public services, land use decisions will remain captive to fiscal and economic considerations, with transportation and other factors receiving secondary consideration. 4. Strategy . 0 is of major importance. While ISTEA requires development of both short-term (five-year) and long-term (20- year) plans, the needs and funds available in the long term horizon are very unpredictable. Economic and technological developments may alter patterns "of urbanization, and additional funding sources may become available (e.g. development fees) . In this context., there are risks in identifying specific projects in a lone;-term plan. To address the uncertainties of long-term planning and funding, we suggest a tiered approach in which the first tier is the short-term plan, the second tier incorporates city and county plans, and third tier includes general corridor-level needs which are identified in corridor plans 'prepared in accordance with ISTEA guidelines. The Board of Supervisors looks forware to- working with our MTC Commissioners on developing a Regional Transportation Plan that will serve our needs into the next century. Please keep us informed as work on this important document progresses. Sincerely yours, ' Tom Torlakson, Chair Contra Costa Board of Supervisors cc: Commissioner Sharon Brown ehv:rtpbosA tr The Board of Supervisors Contra Cerrkl of theBatchelor Costa and County Administration Building ( tCounty Administrator oS 651 Pine St., Room 106 VUVJJ V (510)646-2371 Martinez, California 94553-1290 County Tom Powers,1st District Jeff Smith,2nd District Gayle Bishop,3rd District Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District Tom Torlakson,5th District \ o= June 8, 1993 Philip G. Simpson, Project Director California Transportation Plan P.O. Box 942874 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 Dear Mr. Simpson: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the Policy Element, California Transportation Plan Discussion Draft dated February 1993, and endorses the following comments for your consideration. We realize that the Policy Element is the first component of a larger document which is undev development. However, we feel that this element sets the tone for the whole effort, and we request that our comments be considered in the context of the overall project. General comments 1. The section entitled California's Future provides the philosophical base for the entire plan; yet neither this section nor the goals that follow provide a clear sense of direction for California's future transportation system. Rather, they seem to offer all things to all people. We recommend that a statement be included that resources are limited and that choices must be made. 2. Transportation planning is part of a larger planning scheme that encompasses land use, infrastructure, open space and resource protection. The relationship of this effort to broader state planning objectives should be stated. Further, the relationship of the State plan to other transportation plans such as the regional transportation plans and the congestion management programs should also be identified. Goals and Policies for the Next Century 1. Goal #1 should include a reference to standards and priorities for allocating resources. A determination should be made whether all components of the existing system are still needed and at what level they should be maintained. 2. Goal #2 should address the need to balance protection of natural resources and existing developed areas with the development/expansion of major transportation facilities Why does the tourism industry receive special attention? Philip G. Simpson June 8, 1993 Page 2 3. The Plan should include a separate goal, promotion of technology that eliminates vehicular trips. Technology is rapidly changing traditional methods of working and transacting business. Use of personal computers and modems at home eliminates the need for work trips through telecommuting and business trips through home shopping and banking. The composition of the labor force is changing with more temporary and part-time workers. 4. Functional state planning (e.g. water resources, colleges, parks, transportation) greatly influences land use development. The Plan should identify a process for integration of decisions made by state agencies affecting land use. Greater elaboration is needed on how integration with local land use planning will occur. 5. Goal #7 seems to suggest a restructuring of existing funding arrangements. Additional clarity is needed. More flexibility is needed in transportation funding. Attempts to achieve regional equity may dilute the ability to fund major corridor improvements. Transportation development decisions siould consider the true costs of implementation, operation and maintenance as well as the costs of needed support facilities that must be provided by others. 6. Goal #9 should address the institutional requirements for achieving the other goals, particularly the approach for integrating state, regional, and local land use and transportation planning. The state should define a process for identifying issues of statewide significance such as intercity rail plans and achieving concensus on them. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important planning document. We look forward to reviewing future sections of the California Transportation Plan. Sincerely yours, Tom Torlakson, Chair Board of Supervisors The Board of Superv' rs Contra �� � � Ce'rkI theBatchelo 0 Costa and County Administration Building County Administrator 651 Pine St., Room 106 I I (510)646-2371 Martinez, California 94553-1290 County Tom Powers.1st District Jeff Smith.2nd District Gayle Bishop,3rd District Sunne Wright McPeak,4th District Tom Torlakson,5th District June 8, 1993 Tq COl'�n Lawrence D. Dahms, Executive Director Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street Oakland, QA 94607-4700 Dear Mr. rfhms: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the draft Policy Element of the Regional Transportation Plan dated March 2, 1993 , and we would like to offer the following comments for your consideration. We realize that the Policy Element is the first component of a larger document which is under development. However, we feel that this element sets the tone for the whole effort, and we request that our comments be considered in the context of the overall project. 1. In general, the goals and objectives are very broad. The Policy Element Chart, identifying linkages between goal, objectives, and strategies is interesting, but it is not clear how it will be used to guide funding decisions. Our concern is that a policy framework will be constructed that could rationalize virtually any funding decision. This section should set the stage for meaningful analyses of cost- effectiveness of different strategies so that tradeoffs may be identified on a project by project basis. In addition, the relationship of the Regional Transportation Plan to the California Transportation Plan should be specified. The linkages between air quality and transportation need greater emphasis. Finally, the Regional Transportation Plan should be based upon an agreed-upon vision of the future Bay Area. 2 . Objective A is oriented to the supply side of transportation development, providing needed capacity. The Policy Element should also support measures on the demand side including those that eliminate the need for trips. Technology is rapidly changing traditional methods of working and transacting business through use of personal computers and modems at home or at remote sites. In addition, many local jurisdictions have adopted trip reduction ordinances and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District is requiring large employers to develop trip reduction plans. The cumulative Lawrence D. Dahms June 8, 1993 Page 2 effect of these programs should be incorporated in the planning for new facilities. 3 . Strategy B recognizes the need for a regional land use plan that will guide transportation decision making. MTC should participate in a partnership with appropriate local agencies; however, the congestion management agencies may not be the most appropriate local agencies since they do not have direct responsibility for land use planning. Unless the state changes the structure for providing local public services, land use decisions will remain captive to fiscal and economic considerations, with transportation and other factors receiving secondary consideration. 4 . Strategy C is of major importance. While ISTEA requires development of both short-term (five-year) and long-term (20- year) plans, the needs and funds available in the long term horizon are very unpredictable. Economic and technological developments may alter patterns of urbanization, and additional funding sources may become available (e.g. development fees) . In this context, there are risks in identifying specific projects in a long-term plan. To address the uncertainties of long-term planning and funding, we suggest a tiered approach in which the first tier is the short-term plan, the second tier incorporates city and county plans, and third tier includes general corridor-level needs which are identified in corridor plans prepared in accordance with ISTEA guidelines. The Board of Supervisors looks forware to working with our MTC Commissioners on developing a Regional Transportation Plan that will serve our needs into the next century. Please keep us informed as work on this important document progresses. Sincerely yours, -7;,;4//r Tom Torlakson, Chair Contra Costa Board of Supervisors cc: Commissioner Sharon Brown ehv:rtpbos.ltr The Board of Supervrs Contra • Phil Batchelor Clerk of the Board and County Administration BuildingCOcta County Administrator 651 Pine St., Room 106 Costa (510)646-23-1 Martinez, California 94553-1290 County Tom Powers. 1st District Jeff Smith,2nd District Gayle Bishop.3rd District Sunne Wright McPeak.4th District Tom Torlakson,5th District rf�'i'll June 8, 1993 Philip G. Simpson, Project Director California Transportation Plan P.O. Box 942874 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 Dear Mr. Simpson: The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the Policy Element, California Transportation Plan Discussion Draft dated February 1993 , and endorses the following comments for your consideration. We realize that the Policy Element is the first component of a larger document which is under development. However, we feel that this element sets the tone for the whole effort, and we request that our comments be considered in the context of the overall project. General comments 1. The section entitled California's Future provides the philosophical base for the entire plan; -yet neither this section nor the goals that follow provide a clear sense of direction for California's future transportation system. Rather, they seem to offer all things to all people. We recommend that a statement be included that resources are limited and that choices must be made. 2 . Transportation planning is part of a larger planning scheme that encompasses land use, infrastructure, open space and resource protection. The relationship of this effort to broader state planning objectives should be stated. Further, the relationship of the State plan to other transportation plans such as the regional transportation plans and the congestion management programs should also be identified. Goals and Policies for the Next Century 1. Goal #1 should include a reference to standards and priorities for allocating resources. A determination should be made whether all components of the existing system are still needed and at what level they should be maintained. 2 . Goal #2 should address the need to balance protection of natural resources and existing developed areas with the development/expansion of major transportation facilities Why does the tourism industry receive special attention? Philip G. Simpson June 8 , 1993 Page 2 3 . The Plan should include a separate goal, promotion of technology that eliminates vehicular trips. Technology is rapidly changing traditional methods of working and transacting business. Use of personal computers and modems at home eliminates the need for work trips through telecommuting and business trips through home shopping and banking. The composition of the labor force is changing with more temporary and part-time workers. 4 . Functional state planning (e.g. water resources, colleges, parks, transportation) greatly influences land use development. The Plan should identify a process for integration of decisions made by state agencies affecting land use. Greater elaboration is needed on how integration with local land use planning will occur. 5. Goal #7 seems to suggest a restructuring of existing funding arrangements. Additional clarity is needed. More flexibility is needed in transportation funding. Attempts to achieve regional equity may dilute the ability to fund major corridor improvements. Transportation development decisions should consider the true costs of implementation, operation and maintenance as well as the costs of needed support facilities that must be provided by others. 6. Goal #9 should address the institutional requirements for achieving the other goals, particularly the approach for integrating state, regional, and local land use and transportation planning. The state should define a process for identifying issues of statewide significance such as intercity rail plans and achieving concensus on them. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this important planning document. We look forward to reviewing future sections of the California Transportation Plan. Sincerely yours, Idle igv, Tom Torlakson, Chair Board of Supervisors