HomeMy WebLinkAbout3.4 ACTA Measure B
CITY CLERK
File # rn~~[Q]-BJ[Q]
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: October 4, 2005
SUBJECT:
Presentation by the Alameda County Transportation Authority
(ACT A) and Approval of Proposed Amendment No. 1 to the 1986
Measure 8 Expenditure Plan
Report Prepared by: Melissa Morton. Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the 1986 Expenditure
Plan, together with Exhibit "A," Amendment No. 1
~.
1)
2)
Receive the presentation
Adopt the resolution approving Amendment No. 1 to the
1986 Measure B Expenditure Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
There is no fiscal impact to the City of Dublin.
DESCRIPTION: In 1986, the voters of Alameda County authorized a half-cent
transportation sales tax to finance improvements to the County's overburdened transportation
infrastructure. This tax expired in 2002. A detailed Expenditure Plan guides the use of those funds. The
1986 Expenditure Plan authorized the expenditure of local transportation funds to extend BART to
DubliolPleasanton, open 22 miles of carpool lanes on 1-880, and maintain and expand bus service
throughout the County.
In addition, the 1986 Expenditure Plan funds special transportation services for seniors and people with
disabilities. The Plan also provided congestion relief throughout Alameda County by adding lanes to 1-
880 Overpasses, improving the 1-58011-680 interchange in Dublin and Pleasanton, which included
widening sections ofI-580, reconstructing the Route 13/Highway 24 interchange, extending Route 84 in
Livermore to remove highway traffic from the downtown area, improving access to thc Oakland
Internationa] Airport, and upgrading surface streets and arterial roadways. Most of the 10 major projects
authorized by the 1986 Expenditure Plan have been completed or arc under construction, and those that
are stil1 in the design and environmental review stage arc scheduled to begin construction in the next few
years.
Specifically, the 1986 Expenditure P1an included Measure B funds for the constTllction of a 53-mile
segment of Route 238 on a new expressway aligmnent to bypass downtown Hayward, between Industria1
Parkway and 1-580 in Hayward. This project was commonly referred to as the Route 238 Hayward
-- - - --... - ........- --...-_... ----... -----... ----- --......... - - ----........ -...---- ----- ---
COPIES TO: Christine Monsen, ACTIA
ITEM NO.
.3.Lt
ú:\AGENMISClagst Amendment 1 Measure B Exp Plan, doc
ID03
Bypass Project. In the Expenditure Plan, Caltrans was named as the project sponsor. The Bypass Project
has been embroiled in controvcrsies since Caltrans commenced the project design in the mid-1960's. By
the early 1970's, Caltrans had acquired two-thirds of the needed right-of-way for the project, which
triggered a lawsuit by the Sierra Club and the Legal Aid Society of Alameda County representing La Raza
Unida of Southern Alameda County. The suit resulted in an injunction, which is stil1 in effect. However,
the Court established a mechanism for the removal of the injunction through a Consent Dccree that was
approved in 1990.
Through the three decades between the 1970's and the 1990's, the development of the Bypass Project was
also impeded by a series of changes in the environmental statutes and regulations, as well as regional and
local transportation plan updates. In 1997, a second lawsuit was filed against the project by thc Hayward
Area Planning Association (HAPA) and thc Citizens for Alternative Transportation Solutions (CATS).
This suit resulted, in 2002, in the final ruling that Measure 8 funds could not be used in the delivery of the
Hayward Bypass Project, effectivcly depleting the only major funding source for the project.
Sincc 2002, the Alameda County Transportation Authority (ACTA) and the City of Hayward have been
working on the development of an altcrnative project to the Hayward Bypass Project that could meet the
purpose of the original project, and one that could be eligible for Mcasure 8 funding.
The Proposed Replacement Route 238/Mission-Foothill-Jackson Corridor Improvement Project includes
the following major features:
· Generally, on Mission Boulevard between Industrial Parkway and Jackson Street, and on Foothill
Boulevard between A Street and Mattox Road, the parking lane would be converted to a through
traffic lane during peak periods only;
· Foothill Boulevard would become one-way northbound from the MissionlFoothil1/Jackson grade
separation to A Street;
· A Street would become one-way westbound from Foothil1 Boulevard to Mission Boulevard;
· Mission Boulevard would become one-way southbound from A Street to the grade separation of
MissionIF ooth i Il/J ackson;
· B Street would rcvcrt to two-way traffic between Foothill Boulevard and Second Street;
· Gradc scparations would be at the intcrscction of MissionIFoothill/Jackson and at the intersection
of Jackson/Watkins;
· Substantial intcrscction improvements at the Mission/Carlos Bee intersection; and
· Other improvements as proposed by the City of Hayward
In April 2005, the ACTA Board voted to approve and include the City of Hayward's proposed Route
238/Mission-Foothill-Jackson Corridor Improvement Project in the 1986 Measure 8 Expenditure Plan,
replacing thc Hayward Route 238 Bypass Projcct.
The statues governing administration ofthe Measure 8 Program require an amendment to the Expenditure
Plan whcn a project is added, deleted, or rcvised in a substantive manner. In order for the Amendment to
become effective, the Amcndment must receive the approval of the majority of city councils in Alameda
County that reprcsents the majority of the population in Alameda County, as well as the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Alameda County Board of Supervisors.
The steps ofthe Expenditure Plan Amendment Process and the proposed time rrame associated with each
ofthe steps are noted in the following:
Page2 ~3
Step Action Start Finish
No.
1 ACT A Board approvcs initiation of Proposed Plan Amendment 04/28/05 04/28/05
2 ACT A Board approves Proposed Plan Amendment language OS/26/05 OS/26/05
3 Plan Amendment forward to MTC, ACCMA and Caltrans 06/0 1/05 06/0 1/05
4 ACT A Holds Public Hearing on Plan Amendment and adopts any 07/28/05 07/28/05
reVISIOns
5 MTC revicws and approves the Plan Amendment 08/0 1/05 09/28/05
6 ACT A presents the Plan Amendment to the County Board of 08/09/05 01/24/06
Supervisors and the City Councils (14) for approval
7 Amendcd Plan documented and distributed 01/24/06 01/31/06
Staff recommends that the City Council receive the presentation and adopt the resolution approving
Amendment No. 1 to the 1986 Measure 8 Expenditurc Plan.
Page3 ~3
ICV\'"L
RESOLUTION NO. -05
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
**********************
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE APPROVAL OF
AMENDMENT NO. I TO THE ALAMEDA COUNTY
TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE PLAN, DATED AUGUST 1986
WHEREAS, in 1986, the voters of Alameda County approved Measure B, a halt~cent sales tax
to pay for transportation projects as described in the Alameda County Transportation Expenditure Plan
(Expenditure Plan), dated August 1986, and to be administercd by thc Alameda County Transportation
Authority (ACT A); and
WHEREAS, the Measure 8 projects and programs in thc Expenditure Plan in North County and
East County have been delivered and ACTA is currently working towards completing thc delivery of the
rcmaining projects in South County; and
WHEREAS, the Route 238 and Route 84 Project, sponsored by the California Dcpartment of
Transportation (Caltrans), was onc ofthc ten capital projects in the Expenditure Plan; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans developed the Route 238 Hayward Bypass Project as "a six lane frecway/
exprcssway along Foothi1l and Mission Boulevards to Industrial Parkway" as part of the Route 238 and
Route 84 Projcct spccitled in thc Expcnditure Plan; and
WHEREAS, court decisions in 2002 specified that Measure 8 funds could not bc utilized to
deli vcr thc Route 238 Hayward Bypass Project as proposed by Caltrans without amending the Expenditure
Plan; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans has relinquished sponsorship of the Route 238 Hayward Bypass portion of
thc Routc 238 and Routc 84 Project in the Expenditure Plan; and
WHEREAS, on March 1,2005, thc City Council of Hayward passed a rcsolution submitting the
Route 238 Corridor Improvement Project to the ACT A as the proposed replacement fur the Route 238
Hayward Bypass Project in regional planning documents and the Expenditure Plan; and
WHEREAS, the ACTA Board approved the concept ofthc proposed Amendment No.1 to the
Expenditure Plan on April 28, 2005, and the speciflc language of Amendment No.1 to the Expenditurc
Plan on May 26, 2005; and
WHEREAS, Amendment No. I to the Expenditure Plan was transmitted on June 1,2005 to the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) tòr review and approval and the MTC approved said
amendment on September 21,2005; and
WHEREAS, the Mayors' Conferencc at their meeting on July 13, 2005, cndorsed the proposed
Amendment NO.1 to the Expenditure Plan by a unanimous vote of those in attendance.
/o-4-os-
/7£rh "3, lj
Z.°bl""L.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that thc City of Dublin hereby approves Amendment
No. I to the Expenditure Plan as defined in Exhibit "A," attached hereto.
BE IT I'URTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor is authorized to exccute Amendment No. I.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of October, 2005.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAINING:
Mayor
ATTEST:
~.".~"'~,~~
City Clerk
g:\ageffmlscIReso Meo,nlft? B Amendmef/l
2
:3 Gb 12.
PROPOSED AMENDMENT NO.1 TO THE 1986 EXPENDITURE PLAN
Thus, pursuant to the enabling 1egislation of Measure B, under Public Utility Code Sections
131304 and 131050, which allows for the Authority to add, delete a project, or to makc changes
of major significance, it is proposed that an amendment to the 1986 Expenditure Plan be
approved to rcflect the following:
1. Delete references to the Route 238 Project currently in the project description in the
Expenditure Plan's Essential Trausportation Project List as follows:
~'~-~,,".
Pro;ect:
Cost:
Sponsor:
Route 238 and Route 84
$77 million Sales tax contribution: $67 million
Caltrans
.-
Description:
Route 238 (Mission Boulevard) will be huilt as a six lane roadway from
Industrial Parkway to Route 84 near Decoto Road, existing Mission
Boulevard will be widened to six lanes to existing Route 84 will then be built
along a previously ado pled alignment where right of way have been acquired
to intersect with 880.
Note: Although the new Route 84 will likely intersect Route 238 somewhere
north of Peralta Avenue, the six lane conventional road is intended to extend
to Peralta Avenue. The remaining $10 million to complete the Route will
come from other sources; i.e., local assessment districts, thus providing
leveraging for the sales taxfunds. The project is contingent upon receipt of
the $10 million. Ifit is not forthcoming, the project will not be built. (2)
Note (2)
Cost break-out is IIsfollows:
A) Rte. 238 through Union City
Widening existing Mission Blvd. to 6 lanes
15M
B) Rte 84 - 4 lane freeway
SSM
C) Engineering/Design
7M
Total
77M
Page 3
~~~~6~
...-- .. ...
L\Dò\"L.
2. Add the City of Hayward's Proposed Route 238/Mission-Foothill-Jackson Corridor
Improvement Project as follows:
Cost:
Route 238/Mission-Foothill-Jackson Corridor Improvement Project In
Hayward
$91.5 million ACTA Measure.R Sales tax contribution: $80.0 million
(inclusive of $1.5 mi/iion jor project definition)
Project:
Sponsor:
City of Hayward
>
iI.
\
,
'.
.!.
Description:
,
'.
f;'/
/
¡:
j
d!'/
I
~
;
'I
'.
¡\¡ameda I Cwnt~
\.
~&='¡.S:=:u-~
*,r.;.~~¡:,y~_~0I*
Route 238/Mission-Foothill-Jackson Corridor Improvements in Hayward will
include capacity and operational as well as pedestrian and bicycle
improvements On Foothill and Mission Boulevards between Mal/ox Road and
industrial Parkway. Between Mal/ox Road and A Street. Foothill Boulevard
wi/i general(v accommodate three northbound and three south hound lanes plus
the conversion of the existing parking lane to a through traffic lane in each
direction during peak periods only. Between A Street and Jackson Street. the
project will convert some existing streets to a new one-way street system as
jollows: A Street will become a one -way street with.five westbound lanes,
joining Mission Boulevard as a one" way street with .five southbound lanes. and
meeting a grade separation at the intersection at Foothill/ Mission/Jack¡on.
From the grade separation, Foothi/i Boulevard will be recon.figured to a one-
way street with six northhound lanes to A Street. Between the grade
separation and Industrial Parkway, Mission Boulevard will accommodate two
lanes northbound and southbound plu.¡ a conversion of the existing parking
lane to a through traffic lane in each direction during peak periods. Several
intersections along Foothill and Mission Boulevards wi/i also be improved,
including, but not limited to, the Carlos Bee Boulevard/Mission Boulevard
intersection. The final scope of the project will be determined by the
environmental clearance process.
Page 4
:5 0b \ L....
Cost and funding break-out and proposed schedule are as follows:
Tentative Cost Breakdown (Subject to Change):
Scoping
Environmental/Preliminary Engineering
Design
Right-o,FWay Support and Capital
Construction Support and Capital
Funding:
$80.0 million -ACTA Measure B
$/1.5 million Citv of Flavward
$91.5 million - Total
Tentative Schedule:
Scoping
Environmental/
Preliminary Engineering
Design
Right-o,FWay Support and Capitai
Construction Support and Capital
Page 5
Cost
($ x 1 million)
1.5
1.5
8.0
12.5
68.0
Total 91..5
Beflin
Spring 2003
Summer 2005
Summer 2006
Summer 2006
Fall 2008
End
Spring 2005
Winter 2006
Spring 2008
Winter 2008
Summer 2011
ÚJ rJå 12.
3. Add the J-580/Redwood Road Interchange Project in Castro Valley as supplemental
improvements to the Hayward Route 238 Corridor Improvement Project as follows:
Project:
Cost:
Sponsor:
I-580/Redwood Road Interchange Improvements Project in Castro Valley
$29 million ACTA Measure B Sales tax contribution: $15 million
Alameda Coumy Transportation Improvement Authority (ACTIA)
De.wription:
", -..!I_.... ... IlllIIiIIIK
~~,. _,.~,...\... Ò~,.. '\
. .....__ ~"j I
"'1 ·.1
~ '!" \J. '~I ¢/
: / .$'I\'tf).~.. \. '.' ,
/~ï"~'~ "".. /
.',It!'~. ':. ~\ \-,. ~,I ,
..1.1 "f?"-" , ,\ /fi J.I CIIIII~ .~,"
"" I " _.' :~;' ../ ~/ .;/-/
,1.1.. I . . .""..". ' (
"', ,(~,,\. -"'~ ./
, I~:'I', ï \ '..
. r" "';..".(I;t I, ". ".\.'>l~, \~:~~..t:,
""'.../' '. '..".....-.'" ,
. ~/ ..... ,.."".~>,.<: 'I ... )ProJect
i\ I <"";,t,,, ~. i{
',I. I, '.' Ii "\
'-' ~ ~- 'M·I.~ \
'\ . ''''''-''''.\, AJamed" I ('>.JOb,
,.<1...' ~ , '
, 'T~ "'. ~. ~\I~' .A1. \!
~;' '¥ \ \ !:~.{I;O.ÆlDWOO ) ROAD INTE~~f:'!,(j~, ~,N ÇAmO VlUtfl'
,.. ~ lIQII~n \ ~r..,~ ~",,,,,,œpIIIII"~,,,",,,
The project is comprised of the ¡,,/lowing elements (subject to de.fìnition in the
environmental document):
.i
f
..
j
~
~
· Construct a new westbound off-ramp .from 1-580 to Redwood Road;
· Construct a new eastbound on-ramp from Redwood Road to 1-580;
· Replace the existing eastbound 1-580 off-ramp to Center Street with a new
off-ramp to Grove Way; and
· Remove the existing westbound on-ramp/rom Castro Valley Boulevard to
1-580.
Cost break-out and proposed schedule are as/ollows:
Tentative Cost Breakdown:
Co.çt
($ x I million)
07
0.7
2.1
8.5
17.0
19.0
Scoping
Environmental/Preliminary Engineering
Design
Right-o.f Way Support and Capital
Construction Support and Capital
Total
Page 6
Funding:
$15.0 million - ACTA Measure B
$11.3 million -ACTIA Measure B
$2. 7 million - Local
$29.0 million - Total
Tentative Schedule:
Scoping
Environmental/Preliminary Engineering
Design
Right-of- Way Support and Capital
Construction Support and Capital
Page 7
Bæin
Spring 2003
Summer 2004
Summer2005
Summer 2005
Spring 2007
7 ób I L-
&!d.
Summer 2004
Fall 2006
Spring 2007
Spring 2007
Fall 2009
B ù'tJ ,?-
4. Add the Central Alameda County Freeway System Operational Analysis as follows:
Description:
Centra! Ala;neda County Freeway System Operational Analysis ..----.-. __"I
$5 million ACTA Measure B Sales tax contribution: $5 million
. A;;~eda County Transportation Improvement Authority (ACT/A) and . .
Alameda County Conl<estion Management Agency (ACCMAL___._.~__,_
j
.........
.t.
"...'.
~
M
<t:/
/
./'
~
¡\J"med"
\ .-'
¡
i\,
I
"
I
,
Cwn\J.j
" "
'-""",'--\'
9=~ m!JNJtFREEWAV S\"5'1"fM OPatATIC)NAl ANA.l~
_\CIII NorIa~''''.'''''~'''''''''rHindirI¡¡fInI".
The tran.\portation planning study will document the long and short range
plan for State hiKhway improvements in the 1-880,1-580 and 1-238
Corridors. in Central Alameda County. The study shall include planning
level traffic operations analysis, traffic congestion and operational
problem/deficiency identification, benefit-cost analysis. pnlject
implementation strategy. and technical report. The Central County area
includes the Cities of Hayward. San Leandro and unincorporated areas of
Alameda County. The suggested limitsfor the corridors to be studied are:
1-880 from Whipple Road to Davis Street; 1-580 from Crow Canyon to 1-
238; and 1-238from 1-580 to 1-880. Specific projects to be considered in
this planning study will include, but will not be limited to those in the
Alameda Countywide Transportation Plan and the ACTIA Measure R
Expenditure Plan. as well as those that already have approved Project Study
Reports. Other roadway improvements may he added as appropriate_
The purpose and objective of the study involves the development of a
I technical report that addresses the long-range plan and the sequencing of
improvements that will be required to achieve the most practical traffic
rdiefin the 1-880. 1-580 and 1-238 Corridors. The technical report will
summarize the various project scopes, schedules and costs; funding
availability; recommended project sequencing; and an implementation
strategy that will provide the improvements that are most cost effective and
consistent with the transportation needs in the area_ The technical report
could be also used or re aration 0 ro rammin documents (Caltrans
Page 8
q6òl2
Project Study Report) for possible Statefundingjrom the State
Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), State Highway Operation
and Protection Program (SHOPP), and/or proceeds from the sales of excess
-~ rizht-of- way /Jursuant to the SB 509 Statute.
Cost break-out and proposed schedule are as follows:
Cost: Costs for the technical studies and subsequent Project Study Reports
will be identified at the initiation of this project.
Funding:
· $5 million - ACTA Measure B.
· No other funding source identified at this time. However, there is
potential fimding from sale of state owned right-oF way associaled with
Route 238 Bypass Project pursuant to the SB 509 Statute.
d'· " ,.~.
Tentative Schedule:
· Technical studies identifying a list of potential projects - 6 months after
Expenditure Plan Amendment approval.
· Project Study Reports for selected projects - 5 years after Expenditure
Plan Amendment approval.
." -,--
Page 9
100() rz...
5. Add the Castro Valley Local Traffic Circulation Improvement Project as follows:
Description:
Castro Valle Local Area Tra lC Circulation 1m rovement Pro 'ect
$5 million ACTA Measure B Sales tax contributÙm: $5 million
Alameda Count fublic Works Agency
~
\
I
Co,
_t.
... "0.
f'
.1
./--
~
.....
~,.-(,.~..
"
)-
I
l
'\
\
Abl11eda\ Crunt4
:,1.
CAS11tO VALI1'V
-,"pCAl JRAFF1t (; ROJ!A.ì1QN IMP~.tQ~ECT
"""",:<I.:oit,r...UWIOOp/·__IlllaAt<
Perform a SLUdy in order to identify and prioritize transportation projects.
and implement projects that advance sajè and efficient mulli-modal
transportation objectives,
Backrlround:
The Route 238 Bypass and the accompanying ramps from 1-580 to the Route
238 Bypass would have provided congestion relief and reduced regional
bypass and cut through traffic on numerous arterial, collector and local
roads in the Baywood area of Unincorporated Alameda County. The
proposed Hayward Route 238 Corridor Improvement Project does not
provide these same benefits. The Baywood area of Unincorporated
Alameda County is bounded by Castro Valley Boulevard, A Street and
Foothill Boulevard.
Descrivtion:
The Alameda Coun~y Public Works Agency (ACPWA) will develop a list of
projects for the potential use of these ACTA fimds that will provide
congestion relief and potentially increased capacity, and may address the
regional bypass and cut through traffic that the Baywood area is presently
experiencing. These projects will be evaluated against a set ofcriteria
developed by ACPWA which may include, but not limited to, congestion ~
reduction. capacity enhancement, regional bypass and cut through traffic
alleviation, cost-benefit. community acceptance, political acceptance,
rojecl readiness and confidence in project implementation. ACPWA will w
Page 10
J I iJè/z..
develop a list of projects to be pursued with the Measure B fimds and
present them to the Board of Supervisors for their review and, if
appropriale, approval. Project information will be shared with the City of
Hayward on an ongoing basis for review and comment.
All phases ofproject development (preliminary engineering, environmental,
design, right-o¡"way engineering and acquisition, and construction capital
and support) are eligible for use of these funds.
It should be noted that the list of projects developed by the ACPW A may not
be included presently in any County transportation programming document.
However, the need for these projects has been known by ACPWA stafJand
voiced by the Baywood area conslituency for some time.
.-
Cost break-out and proposed schedule are as follows:
Cost: Cost for the various project development phases to be developed with
the list of projects by ACPWA.
_.~".
Funding: $5 million
~~~~
Tentative Schedule: Completion of List of Project.\', Evaluation of Projects
and Approval of List of Project by the Board of Supervisors - 6 monlhs after
Expenditure Plan Amendment approval.
Implemenlalion of List of Projects with Measure B Funds - 5 years after
Expenditure Plan Amendment aVDYoval.
-
..
Page 11
IZ-ÔÒ'-¿
6. Add Implementing Guidelines as follows:
a. The goal ofthc Amendment to the Expenditure Plan is to complete the remaining projects
in the Plan in a timely manner. Al1 added projects wil1 be given five years ITOm the date
of the final approval of this Expenditure P1an Amendment to obtain environmental
clearance, approval from all agencies having jurisdiction over the proposed
improvements, support from the community, and ful1 commitment of funds from all
sources required to develop and construct the project. Projects that cannot meet this
requirement may appeal to the Authority for extension(s) of one year duration.
b. Should an added project becomc infeasible or unfundable due to circumstances
unforeseen at the time of the Amendment, funding may bc applied to other proj ects in the
Expenditure Plan by the Authority.
c. Under no circumstance may Measure B funds be applied to any purpose other than direct
transportation improvements in Alameda County. The funds may not be used for any
projects or studies other than those specified in the Amendment without an additional
speci fic amendment to the Expenditure Plan.
d. Project costs in excess of the amount of Measure B funding identified in the Amendment
will be the responsibi1ity of the Project Sponsor. Measure 8 funding for the added
projects and studies are capped at thc amounts identificd in the Amendment.
Page 12