HomeMy WebLinkAbout011624-06.4 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF REPORT 6.4
TO: Mayor and Town Council January 16, 2024
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 1-2024, authorizing the submittal of a request to the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal
Year 2024/25 Transportation Development Act Article 3
Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funds
BACKGROUND
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (“MTC”) is soliciting applications for
Fiscal Year 2024/25 Transportation Development Act (“TDA”) Article 3 funds for
pedestrian and bicycle projects. TDA is a state grant program administered by MTC that
provides annual funding for pedestrian and bicycle facility improvements. Contra Costa
County Public Works Department acts on MTC’s behalf to review and prioritize
applications so that one consolidated county-wide application for local agency funding
can be submitted for MTC’s consideration.
Last year, for the 2023/24 cycle, approximately $1,100,000 was available for Contra Costa
County jurisdictions of which the Town was awarded $80,000 for procurement and
installation of bicycle detection indicators for the Camino Tassajara and Sycamore Valley
Road corridors.
Final applications must be submitted to the County no later than January 25, 2024. Only
one project per jurisdiction will be considered. The County’s TDA Subcommittee will
then prioritize the projects, obtain Mayors’ Conference and Board of Supervisors’
approval of the prioritized list, and then submit the approved project list to MTC in June
2024.
DISCUSSION
The proposed project consists of the design and installation of Rectangular Rapid
Flashing Beacon (“RRFB”) warning systems at three (3) uncontrolled, mid-block
crosswalk locations (Attachment B):
Hartford Road at Iron Horse Trail Crossing
West Prospect Avenue at Iron Horse Trail Crossing
Railroad Avenue at Love Lane
Authorizing submittal of request to 2 January 16, 2024
MTC for TDA Article 3 funds
The crosswalk locations identified for the project represent the final two Iron Horse Trail
crossing locations in need of funding for RRFB systems (Hartford Road and West
Prospect Avenue). The third project location (Railroad Avenue at Love Lane) is a high-
volume, mid-block crosswalk in the Downtown area located adjacent to San Ramon
Valley High School and the Danville Square Shopping Center. The two subject Iron
Horse Trail crossing locations have been identified for RRFB systems in the FY 2023/24
Five-year Capital Improvement Program and the Townwide Bicycle Master Plan.
The RRFB system is an effective safety enhancement that provides advanced warning
messaging to road users of the presence of pedestrians and bicyclists in crosswalks
(Attachment C). As with other RRFB systems installed at Iron Horse Trail crossings in
Danville, this project will include flashing LED crosswalk warning signage, both passive
activation and push button activation, and roadway pavement markings.
The amount of the TDA grant request is $110,000 with a total project cost of $129,356
(Attachment A, Exhibit 1).
PUBLIC CONTACT
Posting of the meeting agenda serves as notice to the general public. As required by the
grant program’s submission requirements, the preliminary TDA application was
reviewed by the Town of Danville’s Bicycle Advisory Commission at its regular meeting
of November 27, 2023.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Authorizing submittal of request to 3 January 16, 2024
MTC for TDA Article 3 funds
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution No. 1-2024, authorizing the submittal of a request to the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024/25 Transportation
Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funds.
Prepared by:
Andrew Dillard
Transportation Manager
Reviewed by:
Diane J. Friedmann
Development Services Director
Attachments: A - Resolution No. 1-2024
Exhibit 1 – 2024/25 TDA Article 3 Project Application
B - Project Location Map
C - Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (“RRFB”) Systems Information
RESOLUTION NO. 1-2024
AUTHORIZING THE SUBMITTAL OF A REQUEST TO THE METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION FOR THE ALLOCATION OF FISCAL YEAR
2024/25 TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT ARTICLE 3
PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE PROJECT FUNDS
WHEREAS, Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), Public Utilities
Code (PUC) Section 99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional
transportation planning agency for the funding of projects exclusively for the benefit
and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the regional
transportation planning agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC
Resolution No. 4108, entitled “Transportation Development Act, Article 3, Pedestrian and
Bicycle Projects,” which delineates procedures and criteria for submission of requests for
the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and
WHEREAS, MTC Resolution No. 4108 requires that requests for the allocation of TDA
Article 3 funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from
each county in the San Francisco Bay region; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Danville desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation
of TDA Article 3 funds to support the project described in Exhibit 1 to this resolution,
which is for the exclusive benefit and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; now,
therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Town of Danville declares it is eligible to request an allocation of
TDA Article 3 funds pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code; and, be it
further
RESOLVED, that the project has been reviewed by the Town of Danville’s Bicycle
Advisory Commission; and, be it further
RESOLVED, that the Town of Danville attests to the accuracy of and approves the
statements in Exhibit 1 to this resolution; and, be it further
RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any
accompanying supporting materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management
agency, countywide transportation planning agency, or county association of
governments, as the case may be, of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part
of the county-wide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim.
DocuSign Envelope ID: B16A0ACE-F824-438E-9330-4E16E48D36E3
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE 2 OF RESOLUTION NO. 1-2024
APPROVED by the Danville Town Council at a regular meeting on January 16, 2024, by
the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:
______________________________
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
_______________________________ ______________________________
CITY ATTORNEY CITY CLERK
DocuSign Envelope ID: B16A0ACE-F824-438E-9330-4E16E48D36E3
MTC, November 2022 TDA Article 3 Model Resolution Page 1
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Transportation Development Act Article 3 Funds
Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects
Instructions for the Use of the Model Governing Body Resolution by Claimants
(A model resolution follows these instructions)
The model resolution contains four parts:
1. Abstract of the purpose of the resolution (optional)
2. Body of the Resolution
3. Attachment A to the Resolution – Required Findings
4. Attachment B to the Resolution – MTC Application Form
All TDA Article 3 claimants should use this model resolution since it includes proper wording for findings to be
made by the claimant.
One resolution may be used for requesting allocations for multiple projects.
A claimant may reformat the resolution for administrative purposes, but any wording changes should be
approved by MTC in advance.
Attachment A, the “Findings,” must be included as part of the resolution. If you have questions about revising
any of the text in the resolution or in Attachment A, or altering any of the findings, please contact MTC for prior
approval.
For attachment B – local Congestion Management agency or county-approved forms may be used in lieu of
MTC’s standard format if basic identifying information about the project and the project sponsor is included. A
separate “Project Application” form must be used for each project. If the claim covers multiple projects, the
multiple claim forms still constitute only one Attachment B. In other words, Attachment B can be one to “n”
number of claim forms, and the total number of pages of Attachment B is the total number of pages of all of the
claim forms (including any accompanying pages).
Where you see INSERT NUMBER, insert – in black type – the number you assign to the resolution.
Where you see INSERT NAME OF CLAIMANT, insert – in upper and lower case black type – the official name of
the city or county (e.g., “the City of Oakland,” “the County of Solano”).
Where you see INSERT NAME OF COUNTY, insert – in upper and lower case black type – the name of the county
from which the claim is being submitted (e.g., “Napa County”).
EXHIBIT 1
EXHIBIT 1DocuSign Envelope ID: B16A0ACE-F824-438E-9330-4E16E48D36E3
November 2022 TDA Article 3 Model Resolution Page 2
Resolution No. xx-2024
Abstract [Optional]
This resolution approves the request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission by the Town of Danville,
for an allocation of Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian and Bicycle Project funding for fiscal
year 2024-25.
DocuSign Envelope ID: B16A0ACE-F824-438E-9330-4E16E48D36E3
November 2022 TDA Article 3 Model Resolution Page 3
Resolution No. xx-2024
Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the allocation of fiscal year 2024-25
Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle project funding
WHEREAS, Article 3 of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section
99200 et seq., authorizes the submission of claims to a regional transportation planning agency for the funding of
projects exclusively for the benefit and/or use of pedestrians and bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), as the regional transportation planning
agency for the San Francisco Bay region, has adopted MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised, entitled “Transportation
Development Act, Article 3, Pedestrian/Bicycle Projects,” which delineates procedures and criteria for submission
of requests for the allocation of “TDA Article 3” funding; and
WHEREAS, MTC Resolution No. 4108, Revised requires that requests for the allocation of TDA Article 3
funding be submitted as part of a single, countywide coordinated claim from each county in the San Francisco
Bay region; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Danville, desires to submit a request to MTC for the allocation of TDA Article 3
funds to support the projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, which are for the exclusive benefit
and/or use of pedestrians and/or bicyclists; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Town of Danville, declares it is eligible to request an allocation of TDA Article 3 funds
pursuant to Section 99234 of the Public Utilities Code, and furthermore, be it
RESOLVED, that there is no pending or threatened litigation that might adversely affect the project or
projects described in Attachment B to this resolution, or that might impair the ability of the Town of Danville, to
carry out the project; and furthermore, be it
RESOLVED, that the Town of Danville, attests to the accuracy of and approves the statements in
Attachment A to this resolution; and furthermore, be it
RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution and its attachments, and any accompanying supporting
materials shall be forwarded to the congestion management agency, countywide transportation planning agency,
or county association of governments, as the case may be, of Contra Costa County for submission to MTC as part
of the countywide coordinated TDA Article 3 claim.
The Town of Danville adopted this resolution on January 16, 2024.
AYES:
NAYS:
Certified to by (signature):
Karen Stepper, Mayor
DocuSign Envelope ID: B16A0ACE-F824-438E-9330-4E16E48D36E3
November 2022 TDA Article 3 Model Resolution Page 4
Resolution No. XX-2024
Attachment A
Re: Request to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission for the Allocation of Fiscal Year 2024-25
Transportation Development Act Article 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project Funding
Findings
Page 1 of 1
1. That the Town of Danville, is not legally impeded from submitting a request to the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission for the allocation of Transportation Development Act (TDA) Article 3 funds, nor is
the Town of Danville, legally impeded from undertaking the project(s) described in “Attachment B” of this
resolution.
2. That the Town of Danville, has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the project(s) described
in Attachment B.
3. A review of the project(s) described in Attachment B has resulted in the consideration of all pertinent
matters, including those related to environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances, attendant to the
successful completion of the project(s).
4. Issues attendant to securing environmental and right-of-way permits and clearances for the projects
described in Attachment B have been reviewed and will be concluded in a manner and on a schedule that will
not jeopardize the deadline for the use of the TDA funds being requested.
5. That the project(s) described in Attachment B comply with the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et seq.).
6. That as portrayed in the budgetary description(s) of the project(s) in Attachment B, the sources of funding
other than TDA are assured and adequate for completion of the project(s).
7. That the project(s) described in Attachment B are for capital construction and/or final design and engineering
or quick build project; and/or for the maintenance of a Class I bikeway which is closed to motorized traffic
and/or Class IV separated bikeway; and/or for the purposes of restriping Class II bicycle lanes; and/or for the
development or support of a bicycle safety education program; and/or for the development of a
comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan, and an allocation of TDA Article 3 funding for such a
plan has not been received by the Town of Danville, within the prior five fiscal years.
8. That the project(s) described in Attachment B which are bicycle projects have been included in a detailed
bicycle circulation element included in an adopted general plan or included in an adopted comprehensive
bikeway plan (such as outlined in Section 2377 of the California Bikeways Act, Streets and Highways Code
section 2370 et seq.) or responds to an immediate community need, such as a quick-build project.
9. That any project described in Attachment B bicycle project meets the mandatory minimum safety design
criteria published in the California Highway Design Manual or is in a National Association of City and
Transportation Officials (NACTO) guidance or similar best practices document.
10. That the project(s) described in Attachment B will be completed in the allocated time (fiscal year of allocation
plus two additional fiscal years).
11. That the Town of Danville, agrees to maintain, or provide for the maintenance of, the project(s) and facilities
described in Attachment B, for the benefit of and use by the public.
DocuSign Envelope ID: B16A0ACE-F824-438E-9330-4E16E48D36E3
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) Crosswalk Improvements
Bureau of Land Management, Esri, HERE, Garmin, INCREMENT P, USGS,
METI/NASA, NGA, EPA, USDA
11/20/2023
0 1 20.5 mi
0 1.5 30.75 km
1:82,230
ATTACHMENT B
L
O
V
E
L
N
R
A
I
L
R
O
A
D
A
V
E
R
A
I
L
R
O
A
D
A
V
E
LE*END
R
A
I
L
R
O
A
D
A
V
E
-
L
O
V
E
L
N
US Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
~fe Roads for a safer future
~IR11tSl111tRtl11ffHW1MHfetrumllm
Rectangular Rapid-
Flashing Beacon
SAFE TRANSPORTATION
FOR EVERY PEDESTRIAN
COUNTERMEASURE TECH SHEET
Multiple lanes of traffc
create challenges for
pedestrians crossing at
unsignalized locations.
RRFBs can make
crosswalks and/or
pedestrians more
visible at a marked
crosswalk.
FEATURES:
• Enhanced warning
improves motorist
yielding
OFTEN USED WITH:
• Crosswalk visibility
enhancements
• Pedestrian refuge island
• Advance STOP or YIELD
markings and signs
RRFBs are pedestrian-actuated conspicuity enhancements
used in combination with a pedestrian, school, or trail
crossing warning sign to improve safety at uncontrolled,
marked crosswalks. The device includes two rectangular-
shaped yellow indications, each with an LED-array-based
light source, that fash with high frequency when activated.
The RRFB is a treatment option at many types of established
pedestrian crossings. Research indicates RRFBs can result
in motorist yielding rates as high as 98 percent at marked
crosswalks. However, yielding rates as low as 19 percent
have also been noted. Compliance rates varied most per
the city location, posted speed limit, crossing distance,
and whether the road was one- or two-way. RRFBs are
particularly effective at multilane crossings with speed limits
less than 40 mph. Consider the Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
(PHB) instead for roadways with higher speeds. FHWA's
Guide for Improving Pedestrian Safety at Uncontrolled
Crossing Locations (HSA-17-072) provides specifc
conditions where practitioners should strongly consider the
PHB instead of the RRFB.
RRFBs can
reduce
pedestrian
crashes by
47%
!
(RRFB)
W-11-2, W16-7P
R1-5
June 2018, Updated | FHWA-SA-18-065ATTACHMENT C
Princeton, NJ. Photo: VHB
EDC-4 STEP: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydaycounts/edc_4/step.cfm
Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB)
CONSIDERATIONS
FHWA has issued interim approval for the
use of the RRFB (IA-21). State and local
agencies must request and receive
permission to use this interim approval
before they can use the RRFB. IA-21 does
not provide guidance or criteria based on
number of lanes, speed, or traffc volumes.
RRFBs are placed on both ends of a
crosswalk. If the crosswalk contains a
pedestrian refuge island or other type of
median, an RRFB should be placed to the
right of the crosswalk and on the median
(instead of the left side of the crosswalk).
RRFBs typically draw power from standalone
solar panel units, but may also be wired to
a traditional power source. IA-21 provides
conditions for the use of accessible pedestrian
features with the RRFB assembly. When RRFBs
are not in common use in a community,
consider conducting an outreach effort to
educate the public and law enforcement
offcers on their purpose and use.
COST
The cost associated with RRFB installation
ranges from $4,500 to $52,000 each, with
the average cost estimated at $22,250.
These costs include the complete system
installation with labor and materials.
References
MUTCD section 2B.12 In-Street and Overhead Pedestrian Crossing Signs (R1-6, R1-6a, R1-9, and R1-9a).
Fitzpatrick, K., M. Brewer, R. Avelar, and T. Lindheimer. "Will You Stop for Me? Roadway Design and Traffc Control Device Infuences on Drivers Yielding to Pedestrians in a
Crosswalk with a Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon." Report No. TTI-CTS-0010. Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, Texas. June 2016. https://static.tti.tamu.
edu/tti.tamu.edu/documents/TTI-CTS-0010.pdf
Federal Highway Administration. (2018). MUTCD – Interim Approval for Optional Use of Pedestrian-Actuated Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons at Uncontrolled Marked
Crosswalks (IA-21). U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC.
Federal Highway Administration. (2013). “Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon” in PEDSAFE: Pedestrian Safety Guide and Countermeasure Selection System. Available: http://www.
pedbikesafe.org/PEDSAFE/countermeasures_detail.cfm?CM_NUM=54
Bushell, M., Poole, B., Zegeer, C., & Rodriguez, D. (2013). Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure Improvements: A Resource for Researchers, Engineers, Planners, and
the General Public. Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center.