WCCTAC

West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee

 

Minutes

May 25, 2007

 

The regular meeting of the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee was called to order at 7:30 A.M. on Friday, May 25, 2007 by Chair Sharon Brown in the City Council Chambers of the City of San Pablo, 13831 San Pablo Avenue, San Pablo, California, 94806.

 

 

1. CALL TO ORDER/SELF INTRODUCTIONS

 

PRESENT:    Sharon Brown, Chair (San Pablo), Maria Viramontes, Vice-Chair (Richmond), Janet Abelson (El Cerrito), Maria Alegria (Pinole)*, Ed Balico (Hercules), Tom Butt (Richmond), Bob Franklin (BART), John Gioia (Contra Costa County), Gayle McLaughlin (Richmond)*,Jerrold Parsons (WestCAT), Joe Wallace (AC Transit)

 

STAFF:          Lisa Hammon, WCCTAC Managing Director

                        Linda Young, WCCTAC Transportation Project Specialist

                        John Rudolph, WCCTAC Management Assistant

                        Jeremy Hughes, WCCTAC Administrative Clerk

                        Bryan Otake, WCCTAC General Counsel

                        Bradley Ward, WCCTAC Treasurer

                        Hisham Noeimi, CCTA Staff*

                       

*Arrived after Roll Call

 

Lisa Hammon introduced John Sighamony of Contra Costa County who will be attending West County meetings in place of John Greitzer.

 

Chair Brown pulled Item 7 from the agenda.

 

 

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

 

Harpreet Sandhu of the Richmond City Council addressed the Board regarding county monies allocated for the installation of cameras and shields in West County taxis. He noted that these measures have not yet been implemented due to the City of Richmond taxi ordinance which he said was not up to par.

 

 

He continued by stating that taxis are currently operating under temporary permits; measures to enact permanent permits are being taken which will enable the installation of the shields and cameras. He asked that the City of Richmond extend financing to next years’ budget. He then thanked Lisa Hammon and John Rudolph for their assistance regarding this matter.

 

Mr. Sandhu drew attention to Janet Abelson's previously voiced concerns regarding accessible cabs in West County. He noted that there is not currently an accessible cab in West County but expressed hope that provisions for one could be implemented county-wide in the near future.

 

In closing he noted that currently, the City of Richmond only provides Paratransit between the hours of 7am and 5 pm; given the lack of a handicap-accessible cabs there is no means of transportation for people with disabilities outside of the noted times.

 

Joe Wallace expressed concern about Yellow Cabs' unwillingness to service areas in North Richmond.

 

Ms. Hammon responded by stating, as part of the Richmond ordinance that was recently drafted, there is language that would require drivers to provide service to all areas of Richmond without bias. She noted that some enforcement of this language within the draft ordinance will be required.

 

Ms. Abelson stated that North Richmond is beneath the jurisdiction of the county however this area will be covered by the City of Richmond for Measure C purposes.

 

On motion by Joe Wallace, seconded by Janet Abelson and carried unanimously the WCCTAC Board voted to adopt the consent calendar as follows:

 

            3.         Approved minutes, Sign-In Sheet, and Meeting Summary from the                               April 24, 2007 Meeting.

 

            4.         Approved Staff Reports.

 

            5.         Approved Transportation Grant/Funding Opportunities. 

 

            6.         Approved FY 07-08 WCCTAC Budget Update.

 

            7.         Approved Update on the West County Taxi Program.

 

 

Item 8: Board Member Comments/Announcements

 

Jerrold Parsons voiced his concerns about the alignment of Highway 4, Interstate 80 and the City of Hercules' plans regarding the upcoming intermodal facilities. He expressed hope that the WCCTAC Board would be included in the process.

 

Ed Balico remarked that the City of Hercules had hired a circulation planning committee to provide project oversight. He stated that when the committee and the City of Hercules were prepared to give a presentation, Mr. Parsons and the WCCTAC Board will be notified.

 

 

Item 9: Legal Counsel Comments

 

Bryan Otake stated that the recent incident that caused the MacArthur Maze Meltdown has initiated a bill, entitled Assembly Bill 1612, which will restrict and/or more tightly regulate commercial, motor vehicle license issuances for hazardous materials. This will address both the skills of the drivers transporting these kinds of materials as well as the companies by whom these persons are employed.

 

Mr. Otake continued by offering as an informational item, the current governor’s proposed budget which will heavily impact transportation via a 1.1 or 1.3 billion dollar transfer of monies which are currently being used for local transit and transportation agencies.

 

Ms. Hammon directed the Board's attention to a memo from Rebecca Long of the Metropolitan Transportation Committee Partnership TAC, which details the dollar amounts that will affect regional transportation agencies as a result of the governor's proposed budget.

 

 

Item 10: WCCTAC Meetings - Summer and Fall 2007

 

Chair Brown noted that the July and August meetings will be combined.

 

Janet Abelson noted the June 29 is one of the League of California Cities policy committee meeting dates and inquired as to whether or not the meeting scheduled for that date could be changed.

 

Chair Brown noted that there are alternates who could attend the proposed meeting.

 

Ms. Abelson expressed hope that the date could be changed so that it would not impact the regular Board meeting attendees.

 

Ms. Hammon noted that there are five Fridays in June. She proposed changing the date to June 22nd if that date presented no conflicts.

 

With no noted conflicts, Chair Brown announced that the date of the June WCCTAC Board meeting will be changed from June 29 to June 22nd.

Ms. Hammon stated that she would send out an email reminder immediately following the meeting. She also noted that the combined July and August meeting would take place on August 10th.

 

 

Item 11: Conversation with MTC Contra Costa Representative Amy Worth

 

Chair Brown welcomed Ms. Worth.

 

Ms. Amy Worth, Contra Costa County representative for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), expressed her gratitude for the opportunity to represent Contra Costa County. Ms. Worth stated that she would present highlights of what is currently going on at MTC regarding West County and listen to the priorities and concerns of the Board.

 

She began by addressing the recent voter approved bonds beginning with the Transit Capital Portion of the Corridor Mobility Bond. She noted that a couple of the issues regarding that component are first, to provide distribution of funds throughout the county. From this, two of the elements that impact West County are AC Transit's receipt of a large portion of these funds in addition to insuring that small operators like WestCAT, County Connection and Tri-Delta receive the funds that they require.

 

Ms. Worth continued by stating that the other issue is freight movement in West County; in particular at the Port of Richmond and along the I-80 Corridor. She noted that one of the primary goals of the committee is to reduce and/or mitigate the impact of increased freight through residential communities. She noted that the key thing for the Bay Area is to have a coordinated plan otherwise available monies might be spent in other active port areas such as Long Beach.

 

The final component of the bond involves partnerships between cities and counties that provide local funding for transportation investments. She stated counties implementing these so called “self-help” initiatives will receive priority when consideration is given regarding matching funds. She noted that Measure J is particularly helpful in this regard as local and countywide dollars are “queued up” for projects.

 

Regarding the state budget and the governor’s plan to divert transit dollars, she noted that the State Senate Transit Committee voted against this proposal. She continued by stating that the cause for the proposed diversion of funds stems from spill-over dollars which arise from an increase in gas prices. Historically the monies generated from this spill-over are routed to transit agencies; this results in the diversion of approximately $130 million for Bay Area projects.

 

 

Ms. Worth continued by noting that she will serve as the Vice Chair of the planning committee for the long range plan, which in the next two years will be reauthorizing the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), in which transportation and land use will play a significant role. She noted that West County will play a significant role in housing development in the coming decades and transportation planning should reflect this.

 

Ms. Worth concluded by stating that she looks forward to working with the WCCTAC Board and extended an invitation for members to contact her with any concerns.

 

Chair Brown asked when the MTC trip to Sacramento would take place.

 

Ms. Worth responded by stating that no trip is currently scheduled.

 

Maria Alegria thanked Ms. Worth for appearing before the WCCTAC Board and echoed the message that has been sent to legislators regarding the need for the monies that have been promised to transit agencies to aid in moving their projects along. She also expressed gratitude for Senator Perata's stated belief that the issue of funds for the cities of West Contra Costa Counties’ transit projects, is of high priority.

 

Ms. Worth noted the benefits of Senator Perata's understanding of the enhanced need to follow through on commitments brought about through voter approved projects.

 

Ms. Abelson commended Ms. Worth on her being in attendance at the WCCTAC Board Meeting and hailed it as a breakthrough in communication between the Board and an elected official. Regarding freight and the Integrated Corridor Mobility Project, she asked if the item on the WCCTAC agenda was the same Corridor Mobility Project to which Ms. Worth had been referring.

 

Ms. Worth replied no, that the project to which she had been referring is a separate set of dollars from the bond allocated for freight.

 

Ms. Abelson stated that she did not understand how in Measure J, West County was contributing as a self-help county.

 

Ms. Worth responded by stating that the funds to which she was referring have not yet been allocated however; counties with a self-help initiative in place will receive priority when consideration is given regarding to whom those funds will be allocated. The other item is the freight piece which has not yet been defined but lends to the need for a unified plan in Northern California.

 

Ms. Abelson put forth to Ms. Worth that with regard to the I-80 Integrated Corridor Mobility Project, there is a gap in funding that directly affects those portions of the project which would have most directly benefited West County. She expressed concern that the freight component of the bond would help move freight more quickly but would not have as much of a positive impact on the local communities as there are not funds provided for these components.

Vice-Chair Viramontes asked if MTC and ABAG can extend the deadline as it is difficult to gain consensus within a two month time frame.

 

Ms. Worth agreed and noted that while the concept is not new, the manner in which it is being approached is, in formalizing the discussions that have been held.

 

Ted Droettboom, ABAG/MTC, stated that the deadline for council resolutions has been extended.

 

Regarding freight movement, John Gioia stated that the Air District is looking at the regulation of ports with intent to study a plan similar to what is happening in Long Beach and L.A., e.g. a freight container fee bill. He noted that a component of this involves looking at air emissions from freight trucks which function as the primary emitters of particulate matter.

 

He continued by stating that moving forward, when new technologies are implemented, ships will become the primary emitters of particulate matter.  However, currently the air district is primarily concerned with addressing the replacement of diesel trucks. He noted that the other issue is reducing the impacts on local communities that increased rail traffic through West County would pose.

 

Mr. Gioia continued by stating that one of the recurring issues that this body has tried to advocate for is building mitigation costs into project costs, e.g. grade separations. In closing he stated that ultimately if grade separations are going to be involved, the project costs should be built-in rather than being derived from air district monies otherwise there may not be enough for the cost of mitigation at the local level.

 

Ms. Worth noted that these are issues of high priority to her and reiterated the sentiment that the cost of mitigation is in reality part of the cost of the project itself.

 

She continued by stating with regard to diesel traffic, that there are a number of air quality bills relative to the bond in Sacramento. She reiterated the importance of mitigating the effects of increased diesel emissions within West County. She noted that a container fee addresses the true cost of transporting the goods that are imported and exported from Contra Costa County ports.

 

Gayle McLaughlin asked about Long Beach's Green Port Policy and whether or not this had been discussed.

 

Ms. Worth responded by stating that the Green Port Policy was the result of a federal lawsuit and has since then become a model for ports around the country. She noted that as state bonds are gone through, the Green Port Model will be of high priority.

 

Lisa Hammon mentioned that at the June Board Meeting, Carolyn Clevenger will hopefully be in attendance. She is working at MTC on the trade corridors issue.

 

John Gioia noted that it may be beneficial at a future meeting to have the air district give a presentation which addresses the ports issue with regard to the impacts of increased freight traffic.

 

Ms. Abelson asked if there have been any studies that link childhood asthma to diesel traffic.

 

Mr. Gioia replied yes, that the county health department as well as the air district, have conducted studies detailing this matter. He noted that there is an aggressive movement to reduce diesel emissions; such have even impacted land use planning with regard to the proximity of housing developments to freight corridors. He noted that West County would be part of discussions relative to this movement and the next few years should see significant progress within this arena.

 

 

Item 12: Recommendation Regarding WCCTAC Financial Advisor or Consultant/Funding for the Developer Fee Projects   

 

Bryan Otake provided a synopsis of the premise for the STMP Program.

 

Mr. Otake noted that the Board has been given the first rank recommendation of the subcommittee; the proposal itself is a full package proposal for both financial consulting services and, if the WCCTAC Board was to choose to implement some sort of bond issuance, Piper Jaffray would provide underwriting services in addition to financial consulting. The proposal presents itself on compensation on a contingency fee basis. If there is no bond issuance or if an alternative funding source is procured there will not be any financial impact on WCCTAC.

 

Mr. Otake continued by stating that another option would be to engage a financial advisor-only consulting firm which would not be on a contingency fee basis and therefore would come out of WCCTAC's general fund. He directed the Board's attention to the terms of compensation and the not-to-exceed levels for the fee at 0.7 percent of par issuance.

 

Mr. Gioia thanked the subcommittee for their work and asked regarding the 0.7 percent contingent status whether or not the subcommittee had examined what other comparable fees are and/or what was the range that was seen.

 

Mr. Otake noted that this is a very unique first-of-its-kind issuance; if it is going to go through a bond issuance process. For complex financing of this sort, rates of 1.0 to 1.15 percent have been viewed. If a bond issuance is to be enacted, it would be relatively small at around $20-25 million which would consequently raise the fees. He remarked that the 0.7 percent rate is quite competitive.

 

Mr. Gioia asked about the listing of the share of the annual debt service and noted that it states, each WCCTAC member will secure a share of the bond with gas tax revenues and lists the five cities but does not list the County. He noted that this would need to be recalculated.

 

Vice-Chair Viramontes thanked the Subcommittee for their work and remarked that under normal circumstances she would not be comfortable having the same company serve as the entity to advise the Board on how to finance the developer fee program and then provide financing for it; however, given that WCCTAC is such a small agency and given that this is a one time effort, she is at ease with utilizing Piper Jaffray for each component.

 

Mr. Otake reiterated that the various options set forth in the proposal are for exemplary purposes only and there will be full, due diligence for all the options.

 

Janet Abelson noted that on page 6 within the proposal packet, there was a chart showing share of the annual debt service showing Richmond at $900,000. She asked if this amount was indicative of costs per-annum or in total.

 

Mr. Otake replied that this amount would be on an annual basis.

 

Ms. Abelson requested clarification regarding this amount and asked if it would be paid out if there were not enough developer fees collected in a particular year to cover the debt service. She continued in asking if there was not as much development occurring within a particular year would this be an occasion during which funds would be drawn from gas tax revenues.

 

Mr. Otake replied yes and wanted to reiterate that due diligence will be performed and that the current proposal is one of many options that could be implemented.

 

Ms. Abelson expressed reservations about committing to any arrangement without full disclosure regarding the amount that the individual cities would be pledging.

 

Vice-Chair Viramontes stated that the Board is not voting on the decision of how to do the bonds or evaluating the details of each bond; all that is being voted upon is the firm itself, with an outline of some of the various methods by which the bond issuance might be approached; further action would be required including presenting the final proposal to the member agencies.

 

Chair Brown stated that all the prospective firms expressed great enthusiasm regarding the project due to its innovative and unique nature.

 

Ed Balico thanked the Subcommittee and remarked that the individual cities should also be aware that if they do not like the deal they still own the financing mechanism to come up with the money.

 

On motion by Maria Viramontes, seconded by Jerrold Parsons and carried unanimously the WCCTAC Board voted to approve appointment of Piper Jaffray as the WCCTAC Financial Consultant/Funding for the Developer Fee Projects.

 

 

Item 13: Discussion on the FOCUS Priority Development Areas (PDA’s)

 

Ms. Hammon requested that the WCCTAC Board give special consideration to and discuss the San Pablo Avenue Corridor Project as a potential Priority Development Area. She noted that BART stations, 23rd Street and San Pablo Avenue, downtown Pinole, and the Hercules waterfront and transit center areas would be identified as “nodes,” and remarked that there are various ways in which this could be structured as an area where infill development could be implemented.

 

She noted that there are differing ideas about whether the jurisdictions or WCCTAC would submit the necessary application. Ms. Hammon then introduced Ted Droettboom of ABAG/MTC who provided an overview of the process in general.

 

Mr. Droettboom began by noting that in essence ABAG/MTC are in the Priority Development Area business for the long term. One of the things they have realized in looking at regional planning in the Bay Area is that about every ten years, there should be a regional plan.

 

He remarked that ABAG/MTC are trying to develop a process that is about continuous planning for the long term. He noted that initial instrument for doing this is something called a Priority Development Area (PDA) where local governments and the region agree that they will begin concentrating mixed use and housing development over the long term.

 

From the regional standpoint, these are areas within existing urban communities, and near major transit investments, that are accepting the need for more housing and are planning for more housing. Over time ABAG/MTC hope to be able to direct more and more regional incentives to those localities that have identified

 

PDA’s. He noted that initially, ABAG/MTC are looking at state bond monies to achieve this.

 

He remarked that this is an “iffy proposition” as “all balls are currently in the air” however there is currently $850 million available statewide for infill incentives. Mr. Droettboom noted that there is a greater amount of money available for local and regional parks as a result of Prop 84 and there is hope that some of this money can be set aside via these regional plans for priority development plans.

 

He stated that ABAG/MTC are currently looking at the Regional Transportation Plan as a potential source of infill development money. ABAG/MTC suspects that over time they will be able to redirect the plan to some of these infill areas.

 

He continued, stating that the initial round of PDA applications are due June 29. Council resolutions in support are due in early September. He noted that he hoped to have the ABAG organization adopt these PDA’s in October. He noted there will be competitive programs for incentive programs or which members of the priority development club are eligible.

 

He concluded by stating there would also be a second round of PDA applications next year.

 

John Gioia asked if “fixed transit” includes regular bus service, and what is meant by “near fixed service?”

 

Mr. Droettboom replied that ABAG/MTC have been deliberately vague as they recognize that one size does not fit all. What they are looking for are areas where transit is looked upon merely as an indifferent alternative; the best examples of which are BART and the San Pablo Rapid Bus.

 

Mr. Gioia asked about bus lines in a particular neighborhood that are a regular bus line.

 

Mr. Droettboom replied yes, and noted that a PDA should be a minimum of 100 acres. They are encouraging people to designate very large areas, as ABAG/MTC are not planning projects, rather communities.

 

Ms. Abelson asked about the San Pablo Avenue Corridor as a project, and whether or not WCCTAC could apply.

 

He noted that WCCTAC could apply as a JPA however the one requirement put upon group applications is that every local government within that application submit a resolution respecting that local governments have land use authority.

 

Ms. Abelson asked if an application for San Pablo Avenue must consist of only nodes or could it consist of the entire length of that stretch of road.

 

Mr. Droettboom encouraged applicants to think as broadly as possible.

 

Ed Balico asked if there are funds specifically allocated to particular regions.

Mr. Droettboom stated that these details have not yet been worked out and all the “balls of incentive funding” are currently in the air. He noted that incentive funding is very much a work in progress.

 

Vice-Chair Viramontes stated that individual cities should submit applications that relate to them as long as overlapping areas don't defeat each other.

 

Mr. Droettboom stated that individual jurisdictions should not be concerned with this issue.

 

John Gioia expressed that he wanted to be very clear about who could apply. He asked, is it the entity with land use jurisdiction; therefore if WCCTAC applies would a resolution be needed for each city represented by the Board.

 

Mr. Droettboom stated yes, but WCCTAC would be the master applicant.

 

Maria Alegria asked if Pinole is interested in submitting an application should this come back to the Board for action.

 

Lisa Hammon noted that it will be brought before the Board at the June 22nd meeting.

 

Ms. Hammon noted that Richmond has envisioned applying for consideration of the Waterfront Area in Richmond, and the Macdonald Avenue/Transit Village, in addition to San Pablo Avenue.

 

She noted that all the cities may have areas outside of San Pablo Avenue for which they would like to submit applications. She encouraged the individual cities to submit applications for these areas and noted that there may be some overlap but WCCTAC would never go forward on an application that affects the local jurisdiction without complete support from that jurisdiction.

 

Jerrold Parsons inquired about whether or not the Hilltop Mall area would be included.

 

Ms. Hammon stated that this would be included as a node within the Richmond Parkway Transit Center Area.

 

Maria Alegria asked about the economic development opportunities of creating jobs along the San Pablo Avenue Corridor. She expressed her view of the importance of this.

 

Item 14: Presentation on AC Transit Service Changes Effective June 3, 2007

 

Chair Brown asked that John Rudolph's presentation be deferred until next month.

 

Ms. Hammon introduced Robert DelRosario of AC Transit, who provided the Board with an overview of AC Transit service changes that will take place on June 24th. He noted that the changes were presented to the WCCTAC Board about a year ago and will be implemented much in the manner that was previously presented.

 

He noted that the changes are entitled ‘Phase One’ of the West County Service Plan. He noted that it has been deemed ‘Phase One’ because it is cost neutral.

 

Mr. DelRosario noted that currently, Line 76 will continue to travel to Contra Costa College via Moyer to Hilltop ending up at the Richmond Parkway Transit Center where it will terminate. Line 71 will cover the other side of this loop, continuing service to Contra Costa College in the manner that it does today. It will then travel to Lancaster, Aberdeen, Birmingham, Hilltop Mall and the Richmond Parkway Transit Center.

 

This eliminates Line 76 to Contra Costa College and the Hilltop Mall. Mr. DelRosario noted that the ultimate goal of the West County Service Plan was to streamline service. He stated that the aforementioned, represents the primary changes to current services.

 

He continued by noting that Line 70 will now cover the segment from Contra Costa College to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center, continuing on its regular route to Richmond BART.

 

Ms. Hammon asked what is the headway on Line 70?

 

Mr. DelRosario stated that Line 70 is now 30 minutes on weekdays, one hour on weekends with Line 71 at thirty minute intervals on weekdays and one hour intervals on weekends. Line 76 will be at 30 minute intervals on weekdays as well as on the weekends. Line 74 will be at 30 minute a frequency on weekends; Line 76 will also be at 30 minute intervals.

 

Mr. DelRosario noted that the segment on the Hilltop Green along Line 70 will be taken out with the L.A. being brought in for a few trips in the morning and afternoon for direct routes to San Francisco; it will also be open to local passengers.

 

He continued by noting changes in Albany and Berkeley with Line 18 taking over the current Line 43 which will terminate at San Pablo/Marin. As well, Line 18 will be kept and cut short at San Pablo/Marin. Service to Costco and Point Isabel will be eliminated but service will continue to be provided to the bulk mail facility.

 

He noted that route 79 will stand as a continuation of Line 15 from downtown Berkeley to El Cerrito Plaza BART as a standalone line.

 

In response to an inquiry from Bob Franklin, Mr. DelRosario stated that before the Board approves any changes, there are necessary public hearings held that address service changes to any route of which more than 25 percent of service hours and/or miles are effected; as well hearings are held to address services that will exist on new streets and/or services that will be eliminated. He noted that notice is issued thirty days prior to the actual hearing.

 

Bob Franklin noted that BART and AC Transit are having their second joint meeting on June 7th.

 

Jerrold Parsons asked if the extension of the 72R will be going to Hilltop.

 

Mr. DelRosario stated that the 72R Rapid will go all the way to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center, stopping at Hilltop Mall once Measure J funds are available.

 

Gayle McLaughlin noted that there is a void in service in the flatlands of Richmond between 23rd and San Pablo. She asked about the likelihood of reinstating Line 68 that previously serviced that area.

 

Mr. DelRosario noted that lines servicing del Norte to the El Cerrito Hills are part of the West County plan; however, this requires additional funding.

 

Janet Abelson remarked that there is almost no service in El Cerrito which is representative of a continuation of a long time pattern marked by the elimination of service between Alameda and Contra Costa. She noted that there are a number of elderly people who would benefit from increased service in her jurisdiction.

 

Chair Brown noted that Item 15 would be deferred to the June meeting.

 

With no further business to come before the WCCTAC Board, Chair Brown adjourned the meeting at 9:15 A.M., until the next meeting to be held on June 22, 2007at 7:30 A.M. at the San Pablo City Council Chambers, 13831 San Pablo Avenue, San Pablo, California, 94806.