Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout061-86RESOLUTION NO. 61-86 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF DANVILLE APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN WHEREAS, traffic and transportation improvements in the nine county San Francisco Bay Area are an immediate high priority to resolve the Bay Area's serious traffic congestion and transit mobility problems that threaten the economic viability of the area and adversely impacts the quality of life therein; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the counties and the cities within the nine county San Francisco Bay Area wish to collectively develop and implement on a county by county basis local traffic and transportation projects that responsibly and adequately deal with current and anticipated traffic congestion and transit mobility problems; and WHEREAS, SB 878 (Boatwright) allows the voters in any county in the nine county San Francisco Bay Area to either create a County Transportation Authority or to authorize the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to implement a retail Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance for the purpose of funding a local transportation expenditure plan which shows a need for the proceeds from that tax; and WHEREAS, the Contra Costa County Conference of Mayors, Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors and Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee has developed and adopted a process and schedule to develop a County-wide consensus on the need for essential transportation projects and on a proposed County Transportation Expenditure Plan to adequately fund the construction and operation of these essential projects; and WHEREAS, a Draft Contra Costa County Transportation Expenditure Plan has been developed in accordance with that process and schedule; and WHEREAS, the Draft County Transportation Expenditure Plan includes the following: 1. A list of essential traffic and transportation projects, the respective sponsoring agencies and an estimate of the cost of each of these projects; 2. An estimate of the current sources of funds available to assist in the completion of each of these projects and an estimate of the additional amounts of funds needed to complete these projects; · A recommendation that the adoption of a one-half cent Retail Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance over a period of 15 years would be necessary to fund the projects identified in the Expenditure Plan; · A recommendation that the Board of Supervisors should request the voters to authorize the creation of a nine member County Transportation Authority to impose and administer the proceeds of such a tax; WHEREAS, the Draft County Transportation Expenditure Plan has been subject to public hearings and submitted to the Metropolitan Tansportation Commission; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has considered and approved a Draft County Transportation Expenditure Plan; and WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has requested that project sponsors indicate their sponsorship and verification of the cost estimates; and WHEREAS, the Draft County Transportation Expenditure Plan has been distributed to the cities and towns in Contra Costa and the County Board of Supervisors for their consideration; and WHEREAS, the Town Council of Danville is a sponsor of the projects shown on Exhibit "A" included in the Draft County Transportation Expenditure Plan and supports the cost estimate shown on the Plan; and WHEREAS, the Town Council of Danville finds that a new and stable source of funding is needed in order to implement essential transportation projects in Contra Costa County to relieve existing traffic congestion problems and preserve the quality of life; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Draft County Transportation Expenditure Plan by a majority of the Board of Supervisors and a majority of the local governments representing a majority of the population of the County in the incorporated areas by a majority vote of the respective councils is required in order to place the measure on the ballot· NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Town of Danville hereby approves and adopts the Draft County Expenditure Plan, pending passage of SB 878 into law. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this by the following vote: AYES: Kennett, Lane, McNeely, Schlendorf NOES: None ABSENT: 0ffenhartz ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: 2.1:st day of July Mayor t , 1986 t~'~, DRAFT Revised 6/9/86 DRAFT DRAFT C ONTF~A COSTA COUNTY DRAFT SB ~78 EXPENDITURE PLANa ROAD PROJECTS Description Sponsor Cost Estimate Completion ef State Route 4 to full freeway standards between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway and between Concord and West Pittsburg (over the Willow Pass to Bailey Road) Caltrans(County)h $ 94,000,000e ,accelerate the comoletion of the 680/24 interchanoe CALTR4NS (County) h 30,000,000b Accelerate the completion of 1-80 HOV lane croject CALTRJNS{County)h 20,000,000o Richt ? wa,v acouisition for State Route rerou%~na from ' ~ioch tO ~rentweoe to an~ ~ ' Syren COUnt? E,000,000 Construction of North Richmond Bypass ~State Route 93) between the new Knox Freeway (near the Richmond/San Rafael Bridge) and 1-80 near Hilltop Richmend/County joint Powers Agreement 49,000,000 Improvements to State Route 242 r o Caltransh {C oncord/C ounty) 25,500,000 1-680 [nterchanoes: E1 Carte Boulevard; Diablo Road; Crow Canyon, Alcosta Boulevard includino park/ride lots Danville/San Ramon 25,000,000 Improvements to Major Arterials: San Ramon Boulevard; Crow Canyon; Alcosta Boulevard San Ramon/Danville 24,000,000 !mmrovmments t¢_~9nacio Valley Road corridor between Concord Blvd. and 1-680 in Walnut Creek Walnut Creek/ Concord/ County 36,000,000 Gateway Environmental assessment and analysis of project alternatives, oreliminary engineering as reauired Lamorinda Cities 2,000,000 Implementation of preferred project alternative (Lamorinda cities to jointly review and establish criteria for project implementation) Lamorinda Cities !7,000,00C Olymoic Boulevard, Pleasant Mill Road to Walnut Creek city limits San Pablo Dam Road couplet - Appian Way to !-80 County County 4,000,000 4,000,000 TRANSIT IMPROVEMENTS Extension of ~ail System throuah North Concord to Eastern Contra Costa County Additional BART parkina aloha Concord and Richmond corridors includina extension park/ride lots Commute ~Iternatives, such as· carpools van pools· other transportation alternatives inc!udiro: local corridor park/ride lots by local jurisdictions to teed BART stat~crs; ~ansis furd~na ~Or capita! improvements. at a ~0 Descent marc? ~or transit and Danatransit ~cencies; and ~eeder service to BART stations, park/ride lots and major employment centers OTHER Riaht of way acouisition and improvements for various types of transportation corri~Ors, servina Western Contra Costa County Contingency Fund Fincludina preliminary enaineering, cost over-runs, environmental assessments) County/BARTh BART/C ountyh County County County 185,000,000d&g 35,000,000d&f 19,000,000c !0,000,000 5,500,000 GRAND TOTAL $590,000,000 CONT!NGENCv DPO.3?TS Based on Reimbursements, Grants and Increased Revenue.~: Funds may Decome available throueh the rein~oursement of funds expended to accelerate ~rojects or funds from currently umanticipated grant sources and increased revenues. The foliowine projects have fundina priority, but are not listed in priority order: Eastern Contra Costa Courty Rail Extensiop im Transit (to a maximum of $!5,000,000); State Route ~, ~iaht of Way Antiocr to Byron (St,000,000); ImDroveme,ts SR/2~?; [-680 uor ~or Improvements includine Znterchanoes an~ Major Arterials; Olympic Boulevard; Sat Paolo Dam Road !-80 to Appian (S2,000,000); and projects listed on the Manaeers and Encineers Countywide Priority List for Road Projects. After full financial proerammino of the aOove projects if ,evehues exceed projections ~ ~ foliowine projects would De all or partially funded, in increments, as a priority cased on the monies available: :, ? ra~ extersion to East County becomes i~;eas~'e, wid=? a,d 4mD~Cve Sta%e Rcuce z %0 ~? ,&n%ioc~ ~mL~RANS~ountyTM !3~,00C,000 Accelerate and construct '-680 witchin: uALTRANS(Countv).~ .~O,vOu,000 Transit ~undime for capital improvement, at a .u ~ercent ma~c~ Cot transit and paratrarsit aee~cies County !I,000,000 a. co do ~ootnotes ~¢mimistratiem of the sales tax under the ~rooosed ieeislation shall not exceed one Dercent (]%) of the tax generated over !~ years (current estimate $~,000,000). Fundine will oe advanced to the State, as appropriate, to accelerate the completion of a project which may already be {unWed oy other sources of money. ~unds will ~e returned to the proposed County Transportation Authority IOTA) in project form. Commute alternatives fundlog ~n this category is availaole to all ouOlic aeencies orovidine they have a TSM ordinance and provisions for a TSM coordinator. SB 878 reeuires BART to match local fumds with 50 percent "BART" funds from Federal, State, 8ART, or sources other tham County Sales Tax monies for projects to De constructed ~y BART. Matching funds provideO Dy the Authority are limited as Follows: $7E million Concord to North Concord; $125 million North Concord to Eastern ~ontra Costa County as determined Dy the funded Alternatives Analysis/Environmental Impact Statement/Report currently in preparation. S2 million funded from BART; S2 million to Oe funded from the Navy. ~e Re Additional funds for State Route 4, Antioch to Byron, may De generated through the community develoDment process. Rail project soonsors may include the Contra Costa Transoortation Authority and/or BART and/or Tri-Delta Transit through the establishment of a Joint Powers Agreement. Sponsorship which is listed with more than one agency shows the responsible agency, as well as the henef~tino aoency who may participate in the development and con- struction of the project. 4 SB 878 EXPENDITt~E PLAN RECOI~ENDATION Recommendation For Sales Tax June 9, I986 The Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (CCTAC) has found that a Retail Transactions and Use Tax Ordinance would be necessary to fund the list of essential countywide transportation projects. The £CTAC recommends that: a) A !/2 cent sales tax ordinance he placed on the Nove~er 1986 ballot to last for a period of ]~ years to fund essential and needed transportation projects in Contra Costa County; A County Transportation Authority should be created to administer the funds mursuar~ to St $7S. It ~s also recommended that the composition of the AuZhor!tv be as te~Iows: THe Transoortatier Jut~erity would be composed of two menloors of the Board of Supervisors appointed by the ~oard, and seven City Council members, selected as described below. WEST E1Cerrito Hercules Pinole Richmond San Pablo C Ei~TRAL EAST (NORTH CENTRAL Clayton Concord Martinez Pleasant Hill Walnut Creek Antioch Brentwood Pittsburg (SOLrFH CENTRAL Danville Lafayette Moraoa Orinda San Ramon INTERCHAN6E MODIFICATION - INTERSTATE 680 Project Sponsor: City of Danville, City of San Ramon and Contra Costa County Project Description: To modify the existino interchanoes to imorove operational efficiency and to increase traffic safety. The followino interchanoes will be modified: Alcosta Boulevard, Crow Canyon Road, Diablo Road, E1Cerro Boulevard and Stone Valley Road. Project Cost Estimate: $25 million Project Objections: ~r To imorove efficiencies of the interchanges to rpduce delay and to reduce the impact on the ooeration of the freeway. tb To increase safety by convertino : existino interchanges to suit the more unban!zed settino in Contra Costa County. N ..m.~ 3 A N Vl LL= "'::~'~'~]': ~3 , ":' ~ . $A.NI ~IA MO ~, . ..,.mmelq ~10 ,'T'='="~ ,..~ ~_~"'~~I nut C k ........ B&VO 'aga"~8o ,, ,'-.' cxu~wm ,L,,dS ~ymlpms i [tpper ree '~,~.- ~ .. .- i uiaDm~~..~ ,/C Iilnviil~ Cu. cf,q,o. ?Y~ t .0,,..?, ..... :ip_ ~' · Du lin \_~,,),.. Fl ~' ,~P"~i~'~ ~ .- -~ ' T Z rne~$ ,, ,, ARTERIAL IMPROVEMENTS IN SAN RAMON VALLEY Project Sponsor: City of Danville and City of San Pamon Project Description: The project consist of the wideninc of San Ramon Valley ~oulevard in the city limits of Danville and San Ramon; Crow Canyon Road from Contra Costa County line to Bollinoer Canyon Road and Alcosta Boulevard in the city of San Ramon. These major arterials will be widen to or 6 lanes and some of the intersections will be modified to accommodate anticipated traffic. Project Cost Estimate: $24 mitlien Project Objective: To provide a uniform 4 to 6 lane roadway to eliminate bottlenecks. To provide a parallel route to Interstate 680 to ease conoestion. "it / o / ,¢, / \ ! ' '~/ , qi ! ·~ ~. : '"'LOCATION MAP ADDITIONAL BART PAl)KING ALONG CONCORD AND RICHMOND CORRIDORS INCLUDING EXTENSION PARK/RIDE LOTS Project Sponsor: BART Contra Costa County Project Description: {see attached list) Construction of parkina structures and surface oarkino lots. Project Estimate: S25million (to be matched by BAPT pursuant to S8 ~78, Project Objectives: Increase access to rail transit at existino stations and create satellite park/ride lots to support bus service. Project Location Richmond Line E1 Cerrito Candidate (City) BART Parking Projects For Funding Under SB878 Planned Total Spaces 1,385 Currently Fundeo Spaces+ 225* Concord Line Orinda Lafayette Walnut Creek Pleasant Hill Concord 7O0 1,070 1,130 1,250 1,985 0 550* 0 1,250' 600* West County Park/Ride Hercules 5O0 500* East County Park/Rides Pittsburg Antioch 2OO 25O 200* 250* S an Ramon ,Danville San Ramon Valley Park/Rides 4OO 3OO 0 0 Undeterminea Location(s) PHS Replacement Total Spaces 1,600 10,770 1,600'~ 5,175' Estimated Cost *Currently for programmed BART funds $90,0(0),0(03 $43,030,CX30