HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03072000 - C.166 TO: Board of Supervisors
• - Contra 'ka
costa
FROM: Transportation, Water and Infrastructure County
Committee
DATE: March 7, 2000
SUBJECT: Updated Transportation Action Pians for Contra Costa County
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Consider draft updated Action Plans for transportation Improvements, developed
by the County's regional transportation planning committees, and provide
comments to those committees as described in Exhibit B.
FISCAL IMPACT
None directly. However, adoption of the updated Action Flans by the Contra
Costa Transportation Authority will establish requirements that cities and the
County must meet in order to receive their Measure C-88 retum-to-source funds.
On February 8, 2000, the Board of Supervisors referred the Action Plan Updates
to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee. Can February 14,
2000, the Committee reviewed the matter and is recommending this report to the
Board. The recommendations in this report will help ensure that the County can
meet the Action Plan requirements and continue to receive Measure C-88 return-
to-source funds.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE
SIGNATURES : jJobn Gioia Chair le Uilkema
ACTION OF BOARD ON March 7, 2000 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the comments in Exhibit B are to be TRANSMITTED to the
Regional Transportation Planning Committees and that the comments reflect the General
Policy of the Board of Supervisors (Exhibit C attached) and that the Board of Supervisors
is not specifically,-endorsing the action plans.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
AYES: NOES:_ ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: John Greitzer (9251335-1201) ATTESTED March 7, 2000
cc: Community Development Department (CDD) PHIL BATCHELOR; CLERK OF THE
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
C NTY A INISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
Updated `transportation Action Pians for Contra Costa County
March 7, 2000
Page 2
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The draft Action Plan Updates are available for review and comment through March 31,
2000. County staff participates on the technical advisory committees that helped
develop the plans. The draft plans have been forwarded by the regional transportation
planning committees to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, which will use them
in updating the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan. Following the close
of the review period, the regional transportation planning committees will adopt final
versions of the plans and forward them to the Authority for inclusion in the Authority's
final Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The Board of Supervisors is
asked to consider whether the plans adequately reflect county interests. Generally, two
elements of the plans were updated: the traffic service objectives, which serve as
performance standards for the regional transportation systems; and the actions called
for in the plans. Exhibit A provides a summary of the Action Plan Updates. Exhibit B
provides comments and suggested additions to the plans, as approved by the
Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee on February 14. The comments
and.suggestions pertaining to rail transportation reflect recommendations made by the
Contra Costa County Ad Hoc Intercity Rail Advisory Committee (AIRAC). The
Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee approved these comments on
February 14 as part of its review of the Action Plan Updates. The Action Plan Updates
were developed by TRANSPLAN (for East County), TRANSPAC (for Central County),
WCCTAC (West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee), SWAT (Southwest
Area Transportation), and THTC (Tri Valley Transportation Council).
EXHIBIT A `�
Summary of the Action Plan Updates
All of the RTPCs have approved Draft Action Plans for review and incorporation into the
Draft Year 2000 Countywide Plan Update. Below is a summary of some key highlights
from those updates.
WEST COUNTY
1. TSOs have been organized around the four goals in the Authority's draft Vision, Goals
and Strategies: congestion alleviation, growth management, alternative modes and
system maintenance.
2. A new regional TSO on growth management has been added; it would be implemented
through changes to local General Plans that encourage a jobs-housing balance, promote
transit-friendly and infill development, and encourage higher-density and mixed-use
development.
3. The schedule for achieving many TSOs has been moved to 2005.
4. Given the drop in transit ridership in the I-80 corridor since the 1994 Action Plan
(reflecting in part reductions in AC Transit service), the TSO for transit ridership has
been reduced from a 20 percent increase to a 10 percent increase. Similarly,the TSO
for ridership on the Capitol Corridor was reduced from 6,400 to 2,000 riders per day
by 2005.
5. An interesting new regional TSO is to maintain 1999 levels of satisfaction as measured
in transit surveys.
6. The Action Plan has added new TSOs and actions to support the creation of a more
comprehensive system of bicycle facilities. The Action Plan also supports the
development of a bicycle plan for'West County and funding for several new bicycle
improvements.
7. TSOs and actions from the San Pablo Dam Road/Camino Pablo Action Plan have been
incorporated into the West County Action Plan.
8. Two TSOs have been added for the Richmond Parkway (which was not yet completed
when the 1994 Action Plan was adopted). achieve LOS "D" at all signalized
intersections and increase bus ridership by five percent along the corridor, both by
2000.
4-5
9. The Action Plan continues to support the extension of BART to Hercules but also
supports shorter-range improvements such as light rail and express bus service in the
interim before such an extension.
CENTRAL COUNTY
I. The Central County Action Plan retains the three tenets from the previous plan. the
commitment to improve freeway corridors for through traffic; establishment of a traffic
management plan to manage traffic flow within Central County; and supporting a
viable transit service.
2. Two additional tenets were added: support continued implementation of the
TIRANSPA+CMANSPLAN TDM program, and support the development of a
Countywide Goods Movement Plan to facilitate the movement of freight.
3. Reflects programming successes regarding use of STIP and Measure C funds to
accelerate construction of HOV lanes on 1-680 from south of the Benicia/Martinez
Bridge to North Main Street.
4. Reflects concurrence with the decision to make the 5'and 6''lanes on SR 242,mined
flow, while strongly supporting pursuit of an HCV connection between SR 4 and I-
680.
5. Supports widening SR 4 between Pacheco Boulevard and SR 242, from 4 to 6 lanes,
along with operational improvements to the I-680/SR 4 Interchange.
6. Requests that the Countywide Plan be used as a vehicle to conduct a"post-mortem"
analysis of the I-680/SR 24 improvements to determine if the recently completed
project there has alleviated congestion on the corridor.
7. Adds a new actiori to work with SWAT,TVTC, CCTA, Caltrans, and the Alameda
CMA to fund and implement a comprehensive study of congestion management
strategies on I-680 between Central County and 1-580.
8. Adds actions to support the TRANSPAC/TRANSPLAN TDM program, expansion of
the Tr ks website/kiosk system, and promotions of feeder bus service to BART.
9. Adds a new action to support better coordination of new growth with available
infrastructure and the preservation of land and open space resources.
10. Adds new actions to continue to implement the Central Contra Costa Traffic
Management Program, in cooperation with other RTPCs, including implementation of
a coordinated, metered signal management project on Routes of Regional Significance,
4--6
and to evaluate the need, timing, and impact of constructing new parallel arterials
accessing Central County.
11.Adds actions to address pedestrian and cyclist's needs in the design, construction, and
maintenance of new roadways, and pursue funding for construction of such projects.
12.Maintains the previously adopted TSO of-30 mph speed and 2.0 Delay Index (DI) on
freeways (15,mph and DI of Z.4 on arterials) by 2010. ,
13.Adds a new TSO to increase transit.trips by 2% per year by 2014.
EAST COUNTY
1. Lowered the D.elay Index ISO,on.SR.4 and Vasco Road;from.3.0 to 2.3. This is a more
ambitious TSO,since cohgested travel tunes must be less than two and a half times,
rather than three times,the uncongested travel time. Translatc4 into speeds, freeway
speeds during rush hour would need to be 24 mph or better during peak hours,
whereas previously the objective.pransiated to a speed,of 20 mph on the freeway
(assuming frceflow speeds of 60 mph).
2. Reduced the Vehicle 0 cupancy objectives, both for SR 4 and Vasco.Road,from 1.25
and 1.3, respectively,to 1.2 for both routes.
3... The TSO of maintaining LOS mid-D for all signalized. ntersections on regional routes
was retained,however, the standard was lowered to M4,at tiro specific intersections;
Bailey Road and West Leland Avenue;,and Buchanan koad and Railroad.Avenue. Both
are at or near the previously adopted objective, ana would likely exceed the standard
should further development occur. '
4. Added an action to expand bus transit service by.working with Tri-Delta to provide
bus-oriented improvements along local routes, pursuing funding for expaanded•bus
service, and implementing transit signal pre-emption capabilities.
'S. Added an action to pursue,jobs-housing balance.in East County by working on growth
policies and programs to promote employment development.
6. Added an action to encourage adequate maintenance of the Transportation System by
working towards ensuring that adequate funds and systems are in place to properly
maintain the transportation system.
4-7
TRI-VALLEY
1. Updated to reflect adoption of Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee and
Strategic.Expenditure flan for allocating funding from that fee.
2. Retains the "gateway constraint" approach from the 1995 Action.flan,which assumes
that the capacity_for single-occupant vehicles at gateways into the Tri-Valley---I-680
north and south, I-580 at the Altamont Pass and Dublin Grade, and Vasco and Crow
Canyon Roads—will not be increased. The new Action Plan, however, adds a new
action that calls for the study of corridor management strategies for addressing
congestion on I-680 between SR 24 and I-580.
3, The updated Action Plan refines policies on ramp metering and jobs-housing balance.
The discussion on ramp metering is now part of a larger section on "corridor
management strategies" and presents a more balanced view of its benefits and
drawbacks. Similarly, the discussion of j6bs-housing balance recognizes the limitations
of that approach as well as its potential benefits.
4. The updated Action Plan incorporates new improvements and services such as the ACE
commuter train,new funding sources such as the TVTDF,changes in legislation such"as
the elimination of the BAAQItiiD's average vehicle ridership rules, and changes to
priorities and projects including the emphasis on implementing congestion management
strategies for the Sunol Grade.
5. The updated Action Plan incorporates newly recommended actions for intersections at
various Regional Routes where potential problems were identified during the update of
the Tri-Valley model.
LAMORINDA
1. The TSOs and Actions from the Pleasant Hill Road and San Pablo Dam Road/Camino
Pablo action plan were forwarded to the Authority in fall 1998 and will be
incorporated accordingly.
.2. The TSO for SR 24 was changed from duration of congestion to a delay index. The
new TSO calls for maintaining a delay index of 2.0 or better on SR 24 between I-680
and the Caldecott Tunnel during peak periods in the peak commute direction.
I A TSO to increase daily ridership on the Bay Point/Colma BART line by 10 percent by
2010 is included.
4-8
4. A series of action items were developed to apply to arterials between SR 24 and the
Town of Moraga, including Moraga Way, Moraga Road, and St. Marys Road. The
actions include:
Incorporate into the Action flan the Lamorinda sub-regional transportation fee
program to fund transportation improvements, requiring new development to pay
their"fair-share"'toward transportation improvements.
■ Seek funding for an auxiliary,lane on eastbound SR24 Gateway on-ramp to
Brookwood and continue completion of improvements to eastbound Brookwood
off-ramp subject to specific design criteria.
" Continue to monitor and participate in MTC's SR24 Caldecott Tunnel Corridor
Study.
■ Review General Plan Amendments and any projects that generate more than 10
peak (am or pm) hour trips to ensure that the proposed project does not violate the
Lamorinda Action Flan. All such projects are subject to LPMC review.
+� Seek funding to construct park-and-ride lots along primary arterial roads
approaching SR 24 where appropriate.
Evaluate the feasibility and opportunities to improve and/or build
walkways/bikeway facilities between as the Lamorinda BART stations and adjacent
land uses and communities as outlined on the map included in the Action Plan.
• Augmentation and expansion of bus service in Lamorinda, including school buses.
w Work with Caltrans and the Highway Patrol, as part of the MTC SR 24 Caldecott
Tunnel Corridor Study to explore the feasibility of implementing a peak period
HOV priority system for westbound Highway 24 at the Gateway Boulevard
interchange.
Avoid ramp metering on interchanges within Lamorinda,
• Explore trip generation allocation and arterial capacity management programs to
tie growth to available traffic capacity.
4--9
EXHIBIT B 1
Recommendations to the Regional Transportation Planning Committees on
Draft Action Plan Updates
East County Action Plan Update
Recommendation: Suggest the following revisions to TRANSPLAN:
• Add a map of existing and proposed bikeways for the East County area and recommend to
the Contra Costa Transportation Authority that this map be included as part of a countywide
pedestrian and bikeway element of the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
• Add an action supporting the funding of alternative-fueled vehicles for transit operators, to
improve air quality.
• Encourage the use of alternative commute modes by supporting more active promotion of
RIDES ridesharing service and commute incentives.
• Add an action for increased coordination of bus services between transit operators (both
intra-county and inter-county).
• Supporting the plan's proposal to explore commuter rail transit for East County on existing
tracks, emphasize the need to use existing rails instead of constructing new rail lines.
• Encourage TRANSPLAN and participating agencies to proceed with development of more
specifics for the rail recommendations in the plan(rail service from East County to other
parts of the county and connecting rail service to the ACE trains bound for Silicon Valley).
• Add a recommendation to have new East County rail service connect with the North Concord
BART station,using existing rail rights of way that parallel the Port Chicago Highway near
the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Continue to emphasize the role of the Pittsburg/Bay
Point BART station as the primary intermodal transfer point for bus-to-BART connections.
West County Action Plan Update
Recommendations. Suggest the following revisions to the West Contra Costa Transportation
Advisory Committee:
• Regarding rail service expansion, urge WCCTAC to focus on adding commute runs to the
Capitol Corridor line rather than a BART extension. This was the recommendation of the
recent Interstate 80 Major Investment Study, due to the high cost of BART extensions
compared to the use of conventional trains on existing tracks(i.e. the Capitol Corridor line).
• Ask that WCCTAC add a new action in the list of actions pertaining to the Richmond
Parkway, as follows: "Create truck access routes to the Richmond Parkway that minimize
truck traffic through residential areas. Specific projects should include extension of
1
discontinuous streets in North.Richmond such as Pittsburg.Avenue and 71h Street or Soto
Street, with final improvements to be determined through the County's North Richmond
Community Enhancement and Circulation Project. " (Improved circulation within North
Richmond would create a route for trucks to get to the Richmond Parkway with less impact
on homes and the Verde School. The County has applied for a federal planning grant
relating to the road extensions and a pedestrian/bicycle overcrossing of railroad tracks
between North Richmond and San Pablo.)
• Urge WCCTAC to press forward with its proposed exploration of transit service
reorganization along the San Pablo Dam Road and Camino Pablo corridors,to improve
service in the area, and its proposal to improve bus service linking the West County cities. In
particular, recommend that the actions included expanded bus service between Pinole,
Hercules, Roden and Crockett.
• The Corridor Action Plan for San Pablo Dam Road and Camino Pablo—which is
incorporated in the draft updated West County Action Plan—should revise the action for a
proposed High-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities Needs Study by establishing a schedule for the
study to be initiated jointly by SWAT and WCCTAC within two years.
• Add a map of existing and planned bikeways for the West County area and recommend to the
Contra Costa Transportation Authority that this map be included as part of a countywide
pedestrian and bikeway element of the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan.
• Add an action supporting the funding of alternative-fueled vehicles for transit operators, to
improve air quality.
• Encourage the use of alternative commute modes by supporting more active promotion of
RIDES ridesharing service and commute incentives.
• Add an action supporting increased coordination of bus services between transit operators
(both intra-county and inter-county).
• Urge WCCTAC to add a reference to the need for transit-oriented development around rail
stations in West County. This type of development will not only make it easier for people to
use transit,but will address some people's fears about security at rail stations by bringing
more people to the rail station areas,making them less "deserted"and safer.
Lamorinda Action Plan
Recommendations: Suggest the following revisions to Lamorinda:
• Add a map of existing and proposed walkways/bikeways for the Lamorinda area and
recommend to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority that this map be included as part of
a countywide pedestrian and bikeway element of the Countywide Comprehensive
Transportation Plan.
2
e
19
• The Corridor Action Plan for San Pablo Dam Road& Camino Pablo should revise its action
for a proposed High-Occupancy Vehicle Facilities Needs Study by establishing a schedule to
the study to be initiated jointly by SWAT and WCCTAC within two years.
• Add an action supporting the funding of alternative-fueled vehicles for transit operators, to
improve air quality.
• Encourage the use of alternative commute modes by supporting more active promotion of
RIDES ridesharing service and commute incentives.
• Add an action supporting increased coordination of bus services between transit operators
(both intra-county and inter-county).
Central County Action Plan
Recommendations: Suggest the following revisions to TRANSPAC.
• Add an action supporting the funding of alternative-fueled vehicles for transit operators, to
improve air quality.
• Encourage the use of alternative commute modes by supporting more active promotion of
RIDES ridesharing service and commute incentives.
• Add an action supporting increased coordination of bus services between transit operators
(both intra-county and inter-county).
• Support the plan's intercity rail recommendations, which call for increased service on
existing routes(the Capitol Corridor,the San Joaquins, and Amtrak services) and completion
and expansion of service using the new Intermodal Facility in Martinez.
• Add a recommendation to have new East County rail service connect with the North Concord
BART station,using existing rail rights of way that parallel the Port Chicago Highway near
the Concord Naval Weapons Station. Continue to emphasize the role of the Pittsburg/Bay
Point BART station as the primary transfer point for bus-to-BART connections.
• Recommend that TRANSPAC add a reference to the need for transit-oriented development
around rail stations, to make it easier for people to use rail service. The presence of rail
stations, and policies for transit-oriented development, can attract major development
proposals that work well with rail transit.
• Recommend that TRANSPAC support rail connections to the ACE commuter express,
similar to the ACE connections called for in the East County Action Plan referenced earlier.
3
Tri-Valley Action Plan
Recommendations: Suggest the following revisions to the Tri-Valley Transportation Council:
• Add an action supporting the funding of alternative-fueled vehicles for transit operators, to
improve air quality.
• Encourage the use of alternative commute modes by supporting more active promotion of
RIDES ridesharing service and commute incentives.
• Add an action supporting increased coordination of bus services between transit operators
(both intra-county and inter-county).
• Support the plan's recommendation that the ACE train be permanently continued after its
demonstration-project status expires, and that the service be expanded.
• Regarding the plan's recommendation for an eastward BART extension to Greenville in
Livermore, with a connection to the ACE train, comment that BART extensions are very
expensive and there may be more cost-effective ways to get more Tri-Valley commuters to
the ACE train.
..�-.. 40
-
TO: Board of SupervisorsOt ?,
a �r
FROM: Dennis M. Barry, AICP Costa
Community Development Director County
DATE: February 15, 20010
SUBJECT: Follow-up Report from Workshop on Future Transportation Investments In Contra
Costa
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Adopt the fallowing principles for establishing transportation priorities for the renewal of
Measure C-88 and for MTC's Transportation Blueprint for the 21" Century:
• Transportation investments for capacity expansion should focus on providing
commuters with reliable and convenient alternatives to driving alone, and the safe and
efficient movement of people and goods;
• Transportation investments should support a countywide policy for compact
development and redevelopment that achieves long-term protection of open space,
appropriate infill of developed areas, reductions in our reliance on automobiles,
economic revitalization, and more affordable housing;
• Transportation investments should promote good health by producing measurable
reductions in air pollution from motor vehicles;
• Transportation investments should dedicate a percentage of revenue that will
significantly address the unmet need to adequately maintain and operate our existing
road system;
• Transportation investments should dedicate a percentage of revenue sufficient for
the development and maintenance of a comprehensive countywide public transit
system that meets the mobility needs of low income, elderly, disabled and school-
age residents; A *f
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
ACTION OF BOARD ON February 15 , 2000_ APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED XX OTHER XX
SER THE ATTACHED ADDENDUM FOR BOARD ACTION.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS 13 A TRUE AND
xj UNANIMOUS (ABSENT _ CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: (Steven Goetz, 9251335-1240) ATTESTED E e br.u a r y 15.. 2000
cc: Community Development Department (CDD) PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERIC OF THE
Public Works Department BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND
R. Ramacier, County Connection COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
D. Kimsey, Metropolitan Transportation Commission
G. Binger, Association of Say Area Govemments
J. Roggenkamp, Bay Area Air Quality Management District
A. Ho, CGEAC (via CDD)
BY , DEPUTY
Report from Workshop on Future Transportation Investments for Contra Costa 1740V
February 15, 2000 ..
Page 2
RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
• Transportation investments for transit operators should be linked to
achieving measurable results in coordinating and consolidating their
operations, and
• Transportation investments for cities and the County should be linked to a
growth management program that requires measurable results for traffic
relief, affordable housing, and compact development;
2. Authorize the Chair, Board of Supervisors, to sign a letter that refers the
adopted principles to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (Authority)
and the regional transportation planning committees, requests that these
principles be used as the criteria for developing projects and programs to
include in the Expenditure Plan for the renewal of Measure C•88, and includes
comments of the Board regarding other matters important to the renewal of
Measure C-88. A courtesy copy of this letter should go to the Chair of the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
FISCAL IMPACT
None to the General Fund.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On February 8, 2000, the Board of Supervisors reviewed the results of their
workshop on potential transportation investments for Contra Costa. The Board
has been requested by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (Authority) to
comment on the priorities for projects and programs to include in the Expenditure
Plan for an extension of Measure C-88, which could be submitted to the voters
as early as November 2000. These priorities could also be submitted to the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), which is developing. the
Transportation Blueprint for the 21"t Century that identifies major transportation
projects and programs that could benefit from increases in tolls, gas taxes or
sales takes dedicated to transportation.
At that meeting, staff recommended that the Board consider adopting principles
for selecting transportation projects and programs to include in the Expenditure
Plan,and that these principles be forwarded to the Authority and the county's
regional transportation planning committees for their use in selecting these
transportation projects and programs. After receiving comments from the public,
the Board directed staff to make certain revisions to the principles for
consideration at their February 15, 2000 meeting. The Board also agreed to
consider comments to the Authority regarding how transportation investments
should be linked with a local jurisdiction's compliance with growth management
requirements
The revisions to the principles are highlighted in the redline/strikeout format
described below.
• Transportation investments for capacity expansion should focus on providing
commuters with reliable and convenient alternatives to driving alone, and the
safe and efficient movement of people and goods] and on the M00Y needs G
Report from Workshop on Future Transportation Investments for Contra Costa
-February 15, 2000
Page 3
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS continued
The mobility needs of residents who do not have access to a car were included
in a separate principle.
• Transportation investments should support a countywide policy for compact
development and redevelopment that#9-achieves long-term protection of
open space, appropriate infill of developed areas and reductions in our
reliance on automobiles, economic revitalization, and more affordable
housing.
The revisions define the quality of life outcomes for compact development.
While goals and quality of life can very by jurisdictions, these above outcomes
should be held as core values countywide.
•
Transportation investments should romote ood health by producin
measurable reductions in air pollution from motor vehicles.
This new principle establishes a priority for investing in transportation projects
and programs the benefit public health.
Transportation investments must aoknow4edge the aignftan should dedicate a
percentage of revenue that will significantly address the unmet need to
adequately maintain and operate our existing road system.
Measure C-88 returns 18% of the revenue It generates to cities and the County
for local street maintenance and improvements, contingent on a jurisdiction's
annual compliance with the Measure C-88 growth management program. This
year the County is eligible to receive $1.6 million. The Board agreed to include
in the principles a reference to the percentage of revenue allocated for local
street maintenance and improvements, but did not specify a percentage. Exhibit
A identifies the impact of continuing existing programs if Measure C-88 were
extended for another 20 years. The column "Local Roads" lists the revenue
dedicated for local street maintenance and improvements based on 18% of the
revenue generated from the sales tax. The Board may wish to determine
whether the current percentage significantly addresses the unmet need to
adequately maintain our existing road system. TRANSPAC and TRANSPLAN
recently met and are proposing 18-20% be dedicated for local roads.
•
Transportation investments should dedicate a gercenLqge of revenue
sufficient for the development and maintenance of a com rehensive
countywidsublic transits stem that meets the mobiiit need of low income,
elderly, disabled and school-age residents
This new principle responds to the Board's desire to establish a priority for
developing a public transit system that meets the mobility needs of low income
residents that are transitioning from welfare to work, the elderly and disabled,
and school-age residents that need to get to and from school. The earlier
principle simply acknowledged the need to expand the capacity of the
transportation system to meet the mobility needs to residents who do not have
access to a car.
Measure C-88 dedicates 7.8% of the revenue it generates for bus transit and
paratransit purposes. The Board agreed to include in the principles a reference
to the percentage of revenue allocated for public transit, but did not specify an
Report from Workshop on Future Transportation Investments for Contra Costa
.,February 15, 2000
Page 4
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS continued
amount. In Exhibit A, the columns "Transit" and "Paratransit" list the revenue
dedicated for these programs, which is 4.9% and 2.9%, respectively, of the total
sales tax collected. At the January 18th workshop, the Bus Transit Coordinating
Council proposed that 30% of the revenue are dedicated for the purpose of
express bus service, neighborhood shuttles, extended evening and weekend
service, youth transportation (including school buses), and expanded paratransit.
The Board may wish to determine whether these current percentages are
sufficient to develop and maintain a comprehensive countywide public transit
system. TRANSPAC and the TRANSPLAN Committee are proposing 14% and
10.5%, respectively, be dedicated for the combined purposes of bus transit and
paratransit.
•
Transportation investments for transit operator
should be linked to achievin
measurable results in coordinating and consolidating their operations.
This new principle establishes a priority for allocating transportation revenue in a
manner that will require BART and the four bus operators in Contra Costa to
establish a seamless transit system for county residents.
• Transportation investments shGuld be used as inoenwe for cities and the
County to jointly aGhieve the related goa4 e should be linked to a growth
management program that requires treasurable results for traffic relief,
affordable housing and
compact development.
This principle was revised in response to the Board's intent to provide comments
to the Authority on how transportation investments should be linked with a local
jurisdiction's compliance with growth management. This revision focuses the
growth management program on the decisions of cities and the County that
affect traffic relief, affordable housing and compact development. Compliance
could be based on performance measures such as 1)the door-to-door travel
time for residents during commute hours, 2) increases in the availability of
affordable housing, and 3) increases in a jurisdiction's development densities
within the urban limit line.
Measure C-88 currently uses the local road program as the Incentive for local
jurisdictions to comply with growth management requirements. The Board
should consider if the present provisions can adequately influence future land
use decisions, or if future land use decisions should be linked to ether
transportation projects and programs funded in the new Measure C-88. The
Board's position can be included in its comments to the Authority.
At your February 8, 2000 meeting, some Board members expressed eoncem
about how the principles would be considered by the Authority. Please be aware
that the Authority has already established a draft Vision, Goals and Strategies
statement to consider as part of the 2000 Update of the Contra Costa
Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the Expenditure Pian for
the renewal of Measure C-88 (See Exhibit B). The Authority has not finalized
this Vision, Goals and Strategies.
The Board should review the Vision, Goals and Strategies to determine if it is
consistent with the Board's principles. The Board should keep in mind that the
Authority is a single-purpose government agency, unlike the Board, which has
countywide general-purpose jurisdiction. However, the Board could suggest that
Report from Workshop on Future Transportation Investments for Contra Costa
'February 15, 2000
Page 5
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
the Authority consider modifying its Vision, Goals and Strategies, if necessary, to
better integrate transportation policy with other polices important to the duality of
life in Contra Costa.
As you are aware, concepts regarding jurisdictional coordination for protecting
our quality of life has been raised in other forums. These forums include the
City/County Relations Committee of the Mayor's Conference, the Public
Managers' Quality of Life Committee, and the Bay Area Alliance for Sustainable
Development.
Based on the principles recommended by County staff, revisions to the Vision,
Goals and Strategies could address the following areas:
• The "Principles and Assumptions" should acknowledge that significant
changes is land use decisions are needed to promote traffic relief, affordable
housing and compact development, and that allocation of transportation
revenues can be a important tool to encourage improved land use decisions.
• Integrate the goal to alleviate congestion on highways and arterials with the
goal to expand travel choices beyond the single-occupant automobile. Some
of the highway expansion strategies may be counterproductive to strategies
that reduce our reliance on automobiles and promote compact development.
• Add an implementation program that will require the development of
performance standards for measuring traffic relief, increases in affordable
housing, and compact development. This implementation program should be
completed by a specified date.
Exhibits
Exhibit A: SCA 3 Revenue Forecasts and Impact of Continuing Existing Programs
Exhibit B: Draft Vision, Goals and Strategies of the 2000 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide
Comprehensive Transportation Plan
ADDENDUM TO ITEM D. 3
February 15, 2000 Agenda
On this date, the Board of Supervisors considered the requests they made
during the Transportation Workshops held on January 18, 2000, and
February 8, 2000 (see the attached Board order).
Steven Goetz, Transportation Planning Chief, Community Development
Department and Dennis Barry, Community Development Department
Director were present. Mr. Goetz presented the staff report and
recommendations.
The Board discussed the issues.
Supervisor Gerber noted that on Page 2 of the draft "Vision, Goals and
Strategies" (as attached to the Board order), under the heading, Principles and
Assumptions, the statement in Item No. 4, "Achieving this vision..." is
fundamentally flawed as an assumption. She stated that longterm
sustainability of a viable economy requires the preservation and
enhancement of the environment and doesn't see these as competing
objectives.
The public hearing was opened, and the following people offered comments:
Jamie Levin, A.C. Transit and Miriam Hawley, A.C. Transit, 1600
Franklin Street, Oakland.
No one else desiring to speak, the Board continued their discussion.
Supervisor Uilkema moved approval of the staffs recommendations.
Supervisor Gioia seconded.
Mr. Goetz inquired if the motion included the comments from Supervisor
Gerber. Supervisor Uilkema stated that it did, and Supervisor Gioia
concurred.
The question was called, and the Board voted unanimously for the motion.
EXHIBIT A ezAo
SCA 3 Revenue Forecasts
& Impact of Continuing Existing Programs /7
(in 1,000s of 1999 $)
iXbsw+>tittti rY.'M y. u Y 'PW1+Mlw.pw+sep+w. ,.d;1Cc
a�
scatYr . , ` ' e�s , ?? ;,c#sUT
arsifiPtriraarictilsNfivi4r
O0'9'i : �,t 14,944.7 2,690.0 y 732.3 433.4 149.4 113,939.5
x t ,#k: y+. 60,675.6 10,921,6 2,973.1 1,759.6 606.8 44,414.5
61,585.7 11,085.4 3,017.7 1,786.0 615.9 45,080.7
"MIX201x..r 62,509.5 11,251.7 3,063.{) 1,81,2.8 625.1 45,757.0
20, ':3 q1 .,,,,-; 63,447.2 11,420.5 3,108.9 1,840.0 634.5 46,443.4
$'i''�Y�,
Q14` ' 64,398.9 11,591.8 3,155.5 1,867.6 644.0 47,140.0
T 65,364.9 11,
�
, '' i 765.7 3,202.9 1,895.6 653.6 47,847.1�,,�,,� ,� � -
2f16G.1; �E$ 66,345.3 11,942.2 3,250.9 1,924.0 663.5 48,564.8
29 ` ' 67,340.5 12,121.3 3,299.7 1,952.9 673.4 49,293.2
2018rs� ..•�` <. 68,350.6 12,303.1 3,349.2 1,982.2 683.5 50,032.6
30
69,375.9 12,487.7 3,399.4 2,011.9 693.8 50,783.2
2. 02'0'4,* . . 70,243.1 12,643.8 3,441.9 2,037.0 702.4 51,417.9
71,121.1 12,801.8 3,484.9 2,062.5 711.2 52,060.6
72,010.1 12,561.8 3,526.5 2,088.3 720.1 52,711.4
2023 r,. 72,910.3 13,123.9 3,572.8 2,114.4 729.1 53,370.3
73,821.6 13,287.9 3,617.3 2,140.8 738.2 54 037.4
74,744.4 13,454.0 3,662.5 2,167.6 747.4 54,712.9
75,678.7 13,622.2 3,708.3 2,194.7 756.8 55,396.8
2127 76,624.7 13,792.4 3,754.6 2,222.1 766.2 56,089.3
2028 , 77,582.5 13,964.9 3,801.5 2,249.9 775.8 56,790.4
58,914.2 10,604.6 2,886.8 1,708.5 589.1 43,125.2
Total r �, ..'. ..' 1,387,989.5 249,838.1 68,0111.5 40,251.7 13,879.9 1,016,008.3
"Note: Revenue generated in fourth quarter of FY 2008-09.
"Note: Revenue generated through third quarter of FY 2028-29.
RKM:CAWPFiLES\SCA3\Revenue Forecasts by Proararn.xis 3.B.
4 �s
EXHIBIT B DRAFT"
2000 UPDATE TO THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTYWIDE COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN ex/�
Circulation Draft--November 19, 1999 —
Ap
Vision, Goals and strategies
Introductory Note The Authority approved the release of the fallowing draft Vision,Goals and Strategies for the 2000 Update at
its November 17,1999 meeting.This version combines the two previous Visions,the first developed for the 2000 Update and the second
developed for the Expenditure Plan for SCA 3.It incorporates revisions from the Planning Committee made at their November 3,1999
meeting and revisions made by the Authority at its November 17 meeting.The Authority will further modify this Vision to reflect
comments made by the RTPCs and other commentoN and decisions made and directions chosen during the development of the 2000
Update.
The Vision for Contra Costa in 2020
Our crystal ball can identify the difficulties that growth and change will bring: more
homes and jobs will result in increased demand on our transportation system. It is up to
us, however, to identify a new vision for the future and to complete the work necessary to
achieve it. For the Authority, that Vision is:
Strive to preserve and enhance the quality of life and promote a healthy, strong
economy sustained by 1) a balanced, efficient transportation network; 2)
cooperative planning;and 3) growth management. The transportation network
should integrate highways, local streets and roads,public transit, and pedestrian
and bicycle facilities to meet the diverse needs of Contra Costa.
Finding the Right Balance
Achieving the Vision will require the Authority to find the right balance among the
different, and sometimes Competing, needs of Contra Costa's residents and businesses,
including:
• Completing and expanding the regional system of roads, transit and pathways while
ensuring that the existing system is well maintained.
• Balancing the needs of through traffic with the access needs and quality of life of
adjoining neighborhoods and business areas.
• Recognizing the differing needs and situations of Contra Costa's subareas while
developing a comprehensive approach to transportation systems.
November 19, 1999 Page 1
X�
DRAFT
2000 Update to the Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan
• Recognizing that new capacity will not in the long run eliminate congestion, adding
capacity for automobiles where beneficial while supporting and encouraging the use of
transit, carpools,bicycles and walking.
All of these needs are important, and the goals and actions contained in the 2000 Update
are designed to meet them all. Finding the right balance among these needs, however,will
require perseverance,cooperation among the jurisdictions of Contra Costa and the
support of residents and the business community.
Principles and Assumptions
The following principles and assumptions provide the framework for the goals for the
2000 Update and the strategies for achieving them:
1. The Bay Area will continue to add more jobs and households.Accordingly, well-
considered steps must be taken to accommodate and influence the amount, location
and timing of Contra Costa's share of that growth.
2. Projects and programs must be affordable and realistic, provide travel options, and be
cost-effective in improving mobility and safety.
3. Decisions regarding how to direct transportation investments, manage the impacts of
growth, and determine appropriate mitigation measures for new development should
be made:
a. Through a cooperative transportation planning process in the context of a
countywide growth management program;
b. Taking into account the priorities of local residents and businesses;
c. Recognizing that local governments are responsible for land-use decisions; and
d. In cooperation with agencies both within and outside of Contra Costa.
4. Achieving this vision will involve an ongoing effort to balance the sometimes
competing objectives of sustaining a strong, viable economy with preservation and
enhancement of the environment.
5. Public input is a critical element for the success of the transportation and growth
management program.
Page 2 November 19, 1999
DRAFT
Vision,Goals and Strategies for the 2000 Update .. -tee
70
Coals and Strategies for the 2000 Update
To direct the actions of the Plan,the Authority established the fallowing goals:
1. Alleviate congestion on highways and arterial roads,
2. Manage the impacts of growth to sustain Contra Costa's economy and preserve its
environment,
3. Expand travel choices beyond the single-occupant vehicle, and
4. Maintain the transportation system.
The Authority will rely on a number of strategies to achieve these goals; these strategies,
and the goals they support, are summarized in the following table and described below in
more detail.
November 19, 1999 page 3
DRAFT
2000 Update to the Contra Cosh Countywide Comprehensive Transports#on Plan
GOALS STRATEGIES
1. Alleviate congestion on highways 1.1. Increase the operational capacity of the existing highway and arterial roads systems
and arterial roods through capital and operating enhancements
1.2. Define and dose gaps in the existing highway and arterial system
1.3. Consistent with a countywide plop to influence the location and nature of
anticipated growth,expand the highway and arterial systems
2. Manage the impacts of growth to 2.1. Require cooperative transportation and land use planning among Contra Costa
sustain Contra Costa's economy County,cities,towns,and transportation agencies
and preserve its environment 2.2. Work to maintain and expand partnerships to achieve the Authority's goals
2.3. Participate in a regional cooperative land use planning process with agencies both
within and outside of Contra Costa.
2A. Support land use patterns within Contra Costa that make more efficient use of the
transportation system,consistent with the General Plans of local jurisdictions
2.5. Require local jurisdictions to(1)establish standards for necessary public capital
improvements,(ii)have new growth pay its fair shore of the cost of such
improvements,and(iii)link land use decisions to the level of local arterial system
capacity that can reasonably be provided
2.6. link transportation investments to(i)support of an urban limit line jointly endorsed
by the County,cities and towns,once it is established,(ii)new developments which
enhance transportation efficiency and economic vitality,and(iii)infill and
redevelopment in existing urban and brownfields areas
2.7. Respect community character and the environment when considering proposed new
transportation capital projects
Page 4 November 19, 1999
DRAFT
Vision,Goals and Strategies for the 2000 Update y
GOALS STRATEGIES
3. Fund travel choices beyond the 3.1. Help fund the expansion of existing transit services,and maintenance of existing
single-occupont automobile operations,including BART,bus transit,school buses,and paratronsit
3.2. link transit investments to increased coordination and integration of public transit
services,or improved connections between travel moles
3.3. Require local jurisdictions to incorporate policies and standards that support transit,
bicycle and pedestrian access in new developments
3.4. Support transit-oriented and pedestrian-friendly developments
3.5. Invest in trolls,walkways,and pedestrion-oriented improvements
3.6. Promote formation of more carpools and vanpools,and greater use of transit,
bicycling,and walking
4. Maintain the transportation system. 4.1. Advocate for stable sources of funds for transit operations
4.2. Require programs for effective preventive maintenance and rehabilitation of the
transportation system
4.3. Provide funding to reduce the backlog of rehabilitation and maintenance needs
4.4. Once the backlog has been addressed,promote stable funding and preventative
maintenance programs that will maintain the long-term health of the system
November 19, 1999 Page 5
01(
Phil
tchelor
The Board of Supervisors Contra OD Clerk offathe Board
and
County Administration BuildingCostacounty administrator
851 Pine Street, Room 105 (925)335.1900
Martinez, California 94553-1293 County
John Glole, 1"District
Gayle S. Ullkema,211 district
Donna Gerber, 3+° District ,. y
Mork DoSaulnier, 41r District cX
Joe Canclarnilla, V District <
p
t�
y
Mr. Charlie Abrams, Chair February 15, 2000
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
1340 Treat Boulevard, Suite 150
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Bear Mr. Abrams:
On February 15, 2000, the Hoard of Supervisors authorized the Chair to transmit the enclosed principles to the Contra
Costa Transportation Authority and the regional transportation planning committees with a request that these
principles be used as the criteria for selecting projects and programs to include in the Expenditure Plan for the renewal
of Measure C-88 (see enclosure). These principles are offered in lieu of list of projects and programs, which the
Authority requested from the Board and the regional committees on December 16, 1999.
The Board of Supervisors adopted these principles after holding discussion during several meetings, hearing from local
experts on transportation, land use and air quality, and receiving comments from interested agencies and organizations
and the public. This discussion reinforced the perspective that our transportation investments not only affect traffic
congestion, but also other factors important to the quality of life that we enjoy in Contra Costa County. The principles
adopted by the Board of Supervisors are intended to ensure that these other factors are considered in the renewal of
Measure C-88.
The Board is aware of the draft Vision, Goals and Strategies prepared by the Authority to help shape the Update of the
Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan and the renewal of Measure C-88. The Authority may wish to use
the Board's principles to modify the Vision, Goals and Strategies so that it is integrated with other policies that protect
and enhance our quality of life. For example,the Vision's assumption that efforts to sustain a strong, viable economy
sometimes compete with preservation and enhancement of the environment, is incorrect. A basic assumption in the
Board's principles is that a strong viable economy cannot be sustained without preserving and enhancing the
environment.
It should be understood that the Board's principles do not endorse the existing percentages of Measure C-88 revenues
dedicated to its transportation programs. Those percentages deserve thorough discussion by the Authority and the
regional committees, and the Hoard members look forward to participating in those discussions.
The Board of Supervisors appreciates receiving the Authority's invitation to comment. We hope the Board's
principles will be used as a reference in discussing and making decisions on the renewal of Measure C-88.
Sin ely,
Donna Gerb , hair
Contra Costa ounty Board of Supervisors
Enol.
Cc: Regional Transportation Planning Committees
Chair,Metropolitan Transportation Commission