WCCTAC
West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory
Committee
Minutes
February 29, 2008
The regular
meeting of the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee was called
to order at 7:31 A.M. on Friday, February 29, 2008 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
(
Maria Alegria (Pinole), Ed Balico (Hercules), Tom Butt (Richmond),
Bob Franklin (BART), John Gioia (Contra Costa
County), Jerrold Parsons (WestCAT), Tony Thurmond (Richmond), Maria
Viramontes, Vice Chair (Richmond), Joe Wallace (AC Transit)
STAFF:
Lisa Hammon, Executive Director
Joanna Pallock, Project Manager
John Rudolph, Project Manager
Linda Young, Transportation Project Specialist
Nancy Cuneo, Administrative Analyst
Erica Draper, Administrative Clerk
Bryan Otake, WCCTAC General Counsel
Bradley Ward, WCCTAC Treasurer
Martin Englemann,
CCTA
2. Public Comment
3. Commendation for Maria Alegria
Chair Brown
presented Ms. Alegria with a commendation for her distinguished service.
Individual board members voiced support and cited specific instances where they
felt Ms. Alegria’s leadership was valuable, and that she would be missed on the
Board.
Consent
Calendar
On motion by Tom Butt, seconded by Maria Viramontes and carried
unanimously, the WCCTAC Board voted to adopt the Consent Calendar as follows:
8. Board Member Comments and Announcements
Chair Brown
noted that Supervisor Gioia announced at the Mayor's breakfast that in
conjunction with the Mayors, WCCTAC would have a joint meeting on regional
planning, land use and climate change. Because
the potential meeting had not yet been discussed by the Board, Ms. Brown felt
it was a premature to announce it, and suggested that the Board could
discuss the proposal and decide if they wanted to add the meeting to a
future agenda.
Mr. Gioia noted
that ABAG, the Air District, the BCDC and MTC, were currently having joint policy
committee discussions around the Bay Area and he felt that in order to
have input we could host a joint meeting and invite the non-WCCTAC
members.
Chair
Brown stated that Ms. Hammon would try to determine future agenda
items and if the group wanted, the subject could be added to a future meeting,
time permitting.
Tony Thurmond
approved allocating 15 minutes on the agenda for discussion.
Ms.
Hammon said that earlier in the week, ABAG staff stated they
were trying to get their outreach meetings conducted by the end of March;
and, if the Board wished, the issue could be agendized in March or
April, with the caveat, that the regular agenda be reduced to
one hour.
The Board, by
consent, agreed to accommodate the discussion at a future meeting.
Mr.
Wallace suggested that if anyone wanted to get comments in to APTA
about the reauthorization, they should do so, as it was important that our
transportation funds not be reduced.
9. Legal Counsel Comments and Announcements
Bryan Otake, Legal
Counsel, informed the Board that the Attorney General has distributed
information to City Attorneys and Attorneys of Special Districts concerning a
series of seminars on preparation of CEQA Documents addressing the Green House
Gas or Global Warming. A workshop will be held in Oakland at the end of March.
The AG has been very active with CEQA in the area of transportation, and has
filed a complaint against the
10. Train and Truck Issues: (1) State
Infrastructure Bond (Proposition 1B) – Trade Corridor Improvements Program
(TCIF) Update; and (2) Update on the Truck Parking Study in Alameda County and
West Contra Costa
Lisa Hammon began
by providing general background on the item; and then introduced Ms. Carolyn
Clevenger from MTC.
1) Ms. Clevenger thanked the Board for the
opportunity to address the body and handed out informational maps, and briefly
reviewed Measure 1B, giving an update on the Trade Corridor Improvement Fund
(TCIF).
Ms. Clevenger then
stated that the CTC had set a regional target; including the Bay Area,
Sacramento, and the Central Valley, of $640-840 million. Ms. Clevenger went on
to say that Los Angeles was not happy with their target of $1.7 billion, and she
expects the discussions to be ongoing.
Applications
were due to the state on January 17, 2008, and a meeting will be held on March
13, 2008 on the Clean Air Act, after which time the CCTA staff will make their
recommendation. It is unclear if it will be made public.
On April 10,
2008, CCTA will adopt a program. Once a
project is selected they will have three months to produce a baseline, with
milestones and standard review. Most projects, after review, will not see money
fully until 2011/2013. The
John Gioia
stated that he felt it was important to have these meetings, and to get the
jurisdictions from Alameda and West Contra Costa together to discuss the public
health issues that need to be addressed as part of the projects, with the next
step being to begin having community meetings to inform the public, and that the
cities should come with their own list of safety improvements that need to be
addressed, as well.
Tom Butt asked
if the Martinez Subdivision Project involves expanding rail traffic through south
Maria Viramontes
stated that the diversion would help
Mr. Gioia stated
that
Ms. Viramontes
ask if Ms. Clevenger’s agency would be willing to come present it to the Board?
Ms. Hammon
suggested that we have the
Janet Abelson
asked what the impact of the movement of the trains would be on childhood
asthma and other health issues in the area.
Ms. Clevenger
stated that would be determined through the environmental review, and that the
full review was not yet prepared for this project; however, it is on the
schedule.
2) Ms. Hammon introduced Beth Walukas from
ACCMA.
Ms. Walukas thanked
the Board for the opportunity to appear, and began by stating that the planning
corridor project has just started and they are beginning to get a handle on the
area truck parking needs which will be included in the county-wide update.
In 2005 Caltrans
received a state transportation partnership planning grant to perform a truck parking
study. Caltrans asked the ACCMA to be the lead on the study for Alameda County.
A task force was established on an RFP for consulting services issued. The Tyoga
group was selected. The purpose of the study was to identify the short term and
long term parking needs with the primary focus on
Locations were
identified where truck parking could be developed along the I-80, 580, and 880
corridors. The study began in June 2007, with the draft expected to be available
in May 2008 and the final complete in June 2008. The process is in preliminary stages.
Findings: (1) Truck stop operations are dictated by our own consumption and
production needs in the East Bay and greater Bay Area. (2) Truck trips on I-80,
880, 238, and 580 begin or end in the Bay Area, with the heaviest truck flows
on I-80, 880, and 580 on the (Altamont Pass to the Central Valley). (3) Land
use is under the purview of local jurisdictions, and uses are rapidly being
converted away from industrial to more profitable uses.
Tom Butt asked
who they envisioned paying for the truck parking facilities.
Ms. Walukas
stated that originally they thought they could work through the truck
initiatives grant; however, the rules were changed so that it is limited to the
number of inter-state highways that are eligible for that grant. The county-wide
planning process which includes, North County, Berkeley, Oakland, Piedmont,
Alameda and Albany, all put aside some funds in the RTP to look more closely at
truck parking issues and development. Funds were also set aside in the RTP
“Vision” which does not have funding tied to it.
Mr. Butt asked
again, “Who do you anticipate will pay for this?”
Ms. Walukas
stated that the bottom line was that, they didn’t know. Alameda County is
taking the responsibility for trying to do so, however, from a regional stand-point,
they would probably need to work with MTC.
Mr. Butt said
that he felt it wasn’t so much the trucks parking; but, that the semi-trucks
were dropping their trailers off on city streets, and that his perception was
that it was primarily long-haul truckers that have deliveries in the Bay Area,
and they have to spend the night there to wait until the delivery location was
open.
Mr. Butt went on
to say that anytime you do something to increase truck traffic you increase all
traffic, and that if the cities pay for these improvements then we are
subsidizing the trucking industry.
Mr. Butt further
stated that he felt this is a solution to address a problem without looking at
the bigger picture of the huge amount of traffic that comes in and out of the
Bay Area and that when moving goods there are only three ways to do so: air,
rail and water.
Mr. Butt
continued by saying that he heard it was cheaper, quicker and resulted in
better air quality if a lot of the containers coming into Oakland would be
transferred to smaller ships and taken up river to Stockton, where they could
be placed on trains, for even longer distance delivery, and that the Maritime Administration
was working on a subsidy to build these special ships.
Ms. Walukas said
that there has been some discussion about “Short Sea Shipping,” but that the
Air District feels that they are just shipping the pollution if barging is done
with out clean barge technology and clean tugs.
One of the
concerns about barging is that the barges are so expensive and can cost up to $35M
each, due in part to provisions in the “Jones Act,” that require any goods moved
from the Port of Oakland to the Port of Stockton be put on American made barges.
Maria
Alegria stated that the port of Stockton had made decisions to get out of the
port business, regulatory wise. They have made what they do in the port
business so restrictive; they have used up their land.
Mr. Gioia said
that because there is a new standard for diesel trucks that will be implemented
over time, you can’t force the existing trucks on the road to change to cleaner
technologies sooner. The advantages of the rail project if the local
communities can get everything they want out of it, can reduce the truck
traffic because more is going by rail.
14.
Proposed AC Transit Fare
Increase; Affect on the Low-Income Student Bus Pass Program and the Interim
Buss Pass Program; Expanding the Program Region-Wide; and Next Steps. (Pulled out of order due to time
constraints.)
Lisa Hammon gave
background on the proposed AC Transit fare increase, the effect that it would
have on the low-income student bus pass program, the Measure J program, and the
RTP list, and we need to determine how to have it included in the RTP for the
region and not just for West Contra Costa.
Ms. Hammon went
on to say that at the last meeting a sub-committee of John Gioia, Janet
Abelson, and Tony Thurmond was set up, letters have been drafted to other
groups and that staff is working closely with groups like Urban Habitat and the
Transportation Justice Working Group. There are really two issues here; (1) the
fare increase, and (2) the reduction in the number of students that could be
served, since we are just buying the youth passes and distributing them to the
students, and not receiving a discount.
Joe Wallace
stated that he is against any fare increase for any transit in our area.
On motion by
Maria Alegria, seconded by Maria Viramontes and carried unanimously, the WCCTAC
Board approved the letter to AC Transit.
11.
Preliminary Draft of the West
County Action Plan
Lisa Hammon directed
the Board to the handout at their places, which was an outline of the
presentation of item. Ms. Hammon thanked Martin Englemann from CCTA and Mike
Mowery from Kimley-Horn. For background, the Technical Advisory Committee has
met three times with two meeting focusing on the multi-modal traffic service
objectives and one meeting looking at the remaining text. If the Board is
comfortable with the preliminary draft, it can be forwarded for broader
comment. There are major changes in this update to the action plan; one is a
shift in focus for traffic congestion relief on I-80 which includes the ITS
improvements we are currently working on, and the second is including both
Macdonald Avenue in Richmond, and John Muir Parkway in Hercules as major
arterials and routes of regional significance. Area wide multi-modal service
objectives that cover the routes in West County have been added.
Ms. Hammon then introduced Martin Engelmann from CCTA.
Martin Engelmann
opened by thanking the Board and the TAC for their significant assistance in
updating the Action Plan for routes of regional significance, and now it is
time to get other input. Contra Costa County Transportation Authority (CCTA) is
the transportation planning body for Contra Costa and has Measure C and the Measure
C Growth Management Program. It has also now poised to implement Measure J,
which is the 25-year extension of the ½-cent sales tax. The growth management
program is here to stay until 2035 and part of the program is the requirement
for multi- jurisdictional cooperative planning.
The Action Plan
for Routes of Regional Significance is an opportunity to say what you want to
do with I-80 and 580 as regional routes that carry a lot of through traffic and
not in one jurisdictions control.
This plan gives
the opportunity to establish goals for transportation in the region and
quantifiable multi-modal transportation service objectives; dates to achieve
those objectives and a set of actions that the local jurisdictions agree to
implement to achieve the actions.
Additionally
when the Growth Management Compliance Check List comes around every two years,
there is an opportunity to report on the actions and procedures as called for
in the action plan.
The Action Plan
is based upon the ABAG projections 2005 forecast out to 2030. It’s also based
upon all of the General Plans among the WCCTAC jurisdictions. General Plans have
been consolidated and we are now looking to achieve those objectives in 2030
based upon those plans. If a jurisdiction has a significant amendment to its action
plan, there is a procedure in this Action Plan for review of that amendment.
The jurisdiction
initiating the amendment has to come to this body and commutate that the
proposed General Plan Amendment does not adversely affect WCCTAC’s ability to
achieve its traffic services objectives.
This is the
third action plan. The first one was in 1994, with the second focused update in
2000. The 2004 update was not done because the focus was on the Measure J
expenditure plan. Now we are revisiting the plan, with a look at I-80 and the
hope that we can create order through the I-80 ICM project.
Mr. Engelmann
introduced Michael Mowery from Kimley Horn to continue the presentation.
Mr. Mowery began
by saying they that the 2000 update was reviewed and it was found there were
many points that could be brought into this update, and reviewed the chapters
of the plan and their purpose. Figure 1 in the Update shows the proposed map of
Routes of Regional Significance in West County, including two new plans for
Macdonald Ave and John Muir Parkway.
Lisa Hammon
reminded Board members that they are four criteria that feed into the
discussion and designate it as a regional route, with a route being one or more
of these criteria; does the road connect two or more regions of the county; does
the road cross county boundaries; does it carry a significant amount of through
traffic; and/or, does it provide access to a regional highway or transit
facility, with Macdonald Avenue and John Muir Parkway categorized under this
last criteria.
John Gioia
questioned Cutting Boulevard as the Caltrans designated route from I-80 to 580
to the San Rafael Bridge; and, should Cutting be deleted if Macdonald is being
added.
Ms. Hammon
stated that the TAC had discussed this as well.
Maria Viramontes
recalled the latest emergency whereby traffic had to be diverted to Cutting,
and feels that the Caltrans designation should be kept to ensure
cooperation.
Ms. Viramontes
questioned when the hearings would take place so they would know how long they
have to comment.
Ms. Abelson
requested additional definition of “Routes of Regional Significance” and
requested Arlington be considered.
Ms. Hammon said
that it could be looked at again.
Ms. Alegria
commented that she did not hear Pinole Valley Road or Appian Way as connectors
to Highway 24 mentioned and suggested that Pinole City staff be consulted.
Mr. Englemann
reviewed the schedule; release the draft today, one month for comments, review
in April and release a second draft at that time, or go to proposal for
adoption stage, with the final adoption occurring in the fall, after the
environmental process is complete.
Jerrold Parsons
had a question for Cutting Blvd, and if it would make sense to move the
designation to Richmond Parkway.
Ms. Hammon said they would look at the issue.
Tom Butt
commented that this was an “old school” kind of draft. Growth forecasts trying
to accommodate the traffic. Then the roads are improved but the growth outpaces
the improvements. We no longer look at the balance of jobs, housing and
traffic. I am beginning to question the whole premise this is built on. I would
like to see this redone looking at where our current and future priorities are,
and what we want our roads and streets to be, with provisions for pedestrians
and bicyclists.
Ms. Hammon
responded by saying that on page 14 through 17 are area-wide objectives that
address the pedestrian and bicycle issues.
Mr. Englemann
suggested that the number of employed residences outnumber the jobs available
and that those numbers be included in figure four. The goal is to continue to
add jobs to achieve balance.
He further
stated that the plan is moving away from the idea of “building our way out of
congestion.” There are not a lot of capital projects to increase capacity, we
are trying to improve what we have and make it operate more efficiently, as
well as looking for more cooperation among the jurisdictions. We use the ABAG
forecasts because we are required.
Maria Alegria
questioned whether we would be looking at the plan through AB32.
Mr. Englemann
responded AB32 is a challenge that CCTA is looking at, and re-circulating our
vision, goals, and strategies and ask if climate change should be emphasized in
the vision. As a regional transportation planning body WCCTAC can focus on
green house gas emissions. CCTA has different opinions at this point, we tried
to insert the word “green”, “environment”, or “healthy” into the vision, and it
has been a robust discussion as to whether those words are appropriate. We
circulated a proposal last November and none of the regional committees asked
us to include climate change.
Mr. Butt
suggested that WCCTAC did propose adding that language, and Ms. Hammon
concurred.
Ms. Viramontes
stated that WCCTAC is the only region that decided to change how it does
business with Measure J going forward for the next twenty years. What is the
percentage of construction vs. mass transit? 60% to 70% of the commitment of West
County funding is to solve the problem of getting people out of their cars into
something else, and the consequence of that is bringing employment together,
reducing miles traveled, reducing green house gases. No other region made that
decision.
Ms. Viramontes
also stated that other regions have growth, and they are trying to manage that
growth. However, It’s also because they keep voting for growth. We don’t have
control over that. We can’t tell them to stop paving over their farmland.
When we vote for
this plan, we are implementing our vision of moving us to 60% to 70% in mass
transit and then trying to manage our 30% of growth. We get a lot of criticism
for not building, and we are holding the line, and trying to manage the traffic
that comes in from the other regions.
On motion by
Maria Viramontes, seconded by John Gioia and carried unanimously to circulate
the plan for comment with the understanding to highlight sections on pages 14,
15 and 16 to give an overview on all the good things we are doing.
13.
STMP Funding Requests: (a) Request for Proposals (RFP) for 2008 Summer
Internship and (b) Bay Trail Funding (pulled out of order due to time
constraints.)
Janet Abelson voiced
concern over the source of funding for the summer internship.
Ms. Hammon stated
that it was proposed to build on the study from last year. It would include
additional intersections; the Specific Plan that Richmond and El Cerrito are
currently working on for San Pablo Avenue, the Del Notre Bart station. The amount
of hours would be increased to 30 hours a week and the amount in the RFP would
be increased to $60,000.
Ms. Abelson stated
the intern program should be connected to an active project.
Ms. Hammon stated
that the project is the Specific Plan for San Pablo Avenue.
Jerrold Parsons
clarified that the Bay Trail gap closure is included in this vote, and stated
that he was a firm supporter.
Motion to move
forward on both parts of the STMP request by Maria Viramontes, and seconded by
Ed Balico. The vote was carried as all in favor, with Janet Abelson abstaining.
12.
WCCTAC Budget Issues and FY 06-07 Audit Report
Lisa Hammon
introduced Bradley Ward, WCCTAC Treasurer.
Mr. Ward directed
the Board to the Basic Financial Statements handout at their place, and
reviewed the report. The STMP went from three projects to eleven. We now all on
track and on top of the control features with monthly finical statements.
Lisa Hammon
stated that the purpose of the control features is to have separate budgets for
each specific project rolling into the overall budget.
Right now, we
have WCCTAC operations, the TDM Program, and Measure C, going forward we will
track special projects with a specific budget and monitored separately in the
software system.
Mr. Ward called
attention to page 11 where the projects are called out.
Ms. Viramontes
questioned the fund deficit on page 13 and page 7.
Mr. Ward
explained that this was an advanced pension plan fund that was being amortized,
and outstanding STMP funds.
On motion by
Maria Viramontes and seconded by Ed Balico the WCCTAC Board voted unanimously
to accept the FY 06-07 Financial Statements/Audit and the Mid-Year Budget
Adjustments.