The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About8.3 Tri-Vly Transp Plan CITY CLERK File # D8J[2J@]-[1J[g AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: Aprilt, 2008 SUBJECT: Review of Draft Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan 2008 Update Report Prepared by Jaimee Bourgeois, Traffic Engineer ctfJ ATTACHMENT: Draft Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan 2008 Update RECOMJ\fENDA nON:~ ~\J 4N FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Receive the presentation and provide comments on the Draft Plan Update that will be documented by Staff and provided in writing to the Tri-Valley Transportation Council (TVTC). Staff time will be required to compile comments and submit them in writing to the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. DESCRIPTION: With the Contra Costa Transportation Authority taking the lead, and in cooperation with the TVTC elected officials, Tri-Valley staff and a transportation consultant, a Draft Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan 2008 Update has been prepared (attached). The Draft Report is available for review by local jurisdictions, Regional Transportation PI~g Committees, Congestion Management Agencies, Transportation Authorities, transit agencies and the--general public. The purpose of this report is to present the Draft Plan, provide an overview of key information, and solicit comments that will be provided in writing to the TVTC in time for review at its next meeting on April 30, 2008. Because the TVTC is comprised of jurisdictions within Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, it is important to clarify participation requirements of jurisdictions within each County. According to the TVTC Joint Powers Agreement (JPA), all Tri-Valley member jurisdictions, including the City of Dublin, are required to consider the Plan when adopting or amending general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances or capital improvement programs. Furthermore, all member jurisdictions are required to bring forward to the TVTC for review and comment "regionally or subregionally significant" transportation projects. In addition, Contra Costa County jurisdictions are required to implement the actions to maintain compliance with Contra Costa County's Measures C and J or risk losing their return-to-source funds. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COpy TO: Page 1 of7 ITEM NO. ~, t- G:\ TRANSPORT A TION\Regional\ TVTC\agsC TVPlanUpdate. doc Although the City of Dublin is not required to carry out the actions, the City does have an interest in the Plan because it establishes priorities through statements of visions and goals; it sets forth policies, such as the gateway constraints policy; and it creates a plan by which the City and its neighbors will follow and shape the Tri- Valley over the next 20 years. Comments can be made that address typographical or grammatical errors; or can address inconsistencies in the report or proposed changes to major elements like the Statements of Visions, Goals and Policies. The remainder of this report provides a discussion of how the TVTC was created and the history of the Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan, followed by a presentation of the major elements in the 2008 Update. Backe:round , In 1988, Contra Costa Couhty voters approved Measure C, a one-half percent sales tax that generated $1 billion in transportation funding over 20 years. The measure also included a Growth Management Program (GMP) that encouraged local jurisdictions to participate in multi-jurisdictional planning. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) was created to implement the GMP. In 2004, Measure J was passed, which extended the sales tax program and the GMP for an additional 25 years. CCT A allocates 18 percent of the sales tax revenue to local jurisdictions that comply with the GMP requirements, which include participation in multi-jurisdictional planning and development of an Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance. The Action Plan must (1) identify Routes of Regional Significance; (2) set Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSO's); and (3) establish actions for meeting the MTSO's. The TVTC, composed of elected officials from Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, Contra Costa County and Alameda County, is one of the multi-jurisdictional planning areas. In addition to developing and implementing an Action Plan, each planning area group, such as the TVTC, must identify thresholds to trigger when impacts of major developments and General Plan amendments should be evaluated against the MTSO's. In 1995, the TVTC developed and adopted the first Transportation Plan and Action Plan, which served as a transportation planning guide through 2010 and as an Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance for Contra Costa County jurisdictions as mandated by Measure C. The Action Plan underwent a focused update in 2000. With the availability of new demographic, land use and travel forecast data, the passing of Measure J in Contra Costa County, the approval of the state-wide Proposition IB, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's update of the Regional Transportation Plan, there is a need to update the Transportation Plan and Action Plan. During the course of the 2008 Plan Update, the TVTC reviewed and updated major elements of the Plan, including the following: · Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies · Routes of Regional Significance · Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives · Implementation Actions · Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program · Development Review Procedures Page 2 of7 This Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update is guided by the following factors: 1. Financial resources are limited. 2. Expansion of major corridors within the Tri- Valley is limited due to existing development and terrain. 3. Development patterns within the Tri-Valley have been geared toward relatively low housing and commercial densities. This pattern is expected to continue in the future and is impossible to service thoroughly with transit. The Plan comprises enhancement to roadway capacity coupled with increased transit service, control of demand, and acceptance of congestion in locations where unavoidable. Improvements to freeways, interchanges, arterials, and intersections are all included but reflect the reality of gateway constraints. Initial planning efforts demonstrated that the TVTC's best interests would not be served by widening any of the gateways for single-occupant vehicles leading into the area. Widening of these gateways would leave the freeways congested, lead to more through traffic, and increase traffic volumes on other Tri- Valley roads. Projects and actions identified in this plan assume that congestion will occur during peak periods at the gateways, but that this will help to meter the amount of traffic entering and exiting the area. The plan is based on the following set of assumptions regarding gateway capacity: · 1-680 North - Six lanes plus HOV lanes · 1-680 South - Six lanes plus HOV lanes . 1-580 West - Eight lanes · 1-580 East (Altamont Pass) - Eight lanes plus HOV lanes · Crow Canyon Road (to Castro Valley) - Two lanes with safety improvements · Vasco Road - Two lanes with safety improvements Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies of an Action Plan help guide its overall direction. Decisions regarding investments, programs development, and development approvals are based on these policies. The original statements from the 1995 Plan include: · Manage congestion and enhance mobility · Encourage alternatives to single occupant vehicles · Integrate planning with air quality, community character, and other environmental factors These statements were retained in the 2000 Plan Update, and the following two additional statements were added: · Increase vehicle occupancy, transit, and TDM programs · Support corridor management and incident management programs Revisions were made to the statements to better reflect transportation themes contained in each Tri- Valley jurisdictions' General Plan. The complete set of statements in the 2008 Update includes: 1. Integrate transportation planning with planning for air quality, community character and other environmental factors. Page 3 of7 2. Support corridor management programs to make the most efficient, effective' and safe use of existing facilities and services. 3. Support incident management programs to maintain mobility when accidents or breakdowns occur on major transportation facilities. 4. Consider both the need for vehicular mobility and congestion reduction, and such livability concepts as walkability, bicycle access and community character. 5. Maintain and actively pursue expanded transit, ridersharing and non-motorized mode options and trip reduction programs to increase accessibility, to increase the transit share of travel in the Tri- Valley and to increase average vehicle occupancy. 6. Manage school-related traffic to enhance safety and reduce peak period traffic impacts. 7. Classify the Routes of Regional Significance as either interregional or intraregional in order to recognize the different trip types served on each Route. Interregional Routes provide linkages between Tri-Valley and other sub-areas and include 1-680, 1-580, SR-84, Vasco Road, and Crow Canyon Road. Intraregional Routes connect communities within the Tri- Valley and include all other Routes of Regional Significance. 8. Maintain established MTSO's on routes of regional significance. 9. Maintain established capacity constraints to limit interregional traffic at Tri-Valley gateways on 1- 580,1-680, Crow Canyon Road, and Vasco Road. 10. Encourage through-trips and interregional travel to stay on interregional routes and discourage diversion of these trips to intraregional routes as a mechanism for ensuring intraregional mobility. 11. Support arterial traffic management strategies that address hotspots at critical intersections and approaches. 12. Respect past regional commitments in the prioritization of funding of projects. 13. Work cooperatively with regional transportation partners to maximize funding opportunities. Routes of Ree:ional Sie:nificance Routes of Regional Significance are roadways that either (1) carry significant through traffic; (2) connect two or more jurisdictions; (3) serve major transportation hubs; or (4) cross county lines. Changes to the Routes of Regional Significance, including a change from the designation "potential future route" to "designated route", requires unanimous agreement by TVTC. After many proposed changes and much discussion, it was decided by the TVTC that in the interest of meeting the overall schedule for completion of the 2008 Plan Update and the likelihood of not coming to consensus on the proposed changes, the prior list of Routes of Regional Significance would be retained1. Efforts will be made over the coming year to clarify the definition of a Route of Regional Significance and identify changes to the existing list of routes to better reflect the current transportation system. Although no changes were made to the routes, a differentiation between interregional and intraregional routes was established. 1 The proposed changes within Dublin included the removal of Hacienda Drive north of Dublin Boulevard as a significant route and the addition of Fallon Road between Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road as a future significant route. The most significant proposed changes outside of Dublin included the removal of Danville Boulevard south of Stone Valley Road; the removal of Hopyard Road, Santa Rita Road, and W. Las Positas, all south of Stone ridge Drive; the removal of Bema I Avenue; the removal of Vasco Road south ofI-580; the removal of First Street, E. Vallecitos, and Hohnes Street; the removal of Stanley Boulevard east ofIsabel Avenue; the addition ofIsabel Avenue (SR-84); and the addition ofEI Charro Road. Page 4 of? Figure 1 (page 11) of the Draft Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan 2008 Update illustrates graphically the Routes of Regional Significance. In summary, the interregional and intraregional routes include at least portions of the following roadways: Interregional Routes 1-580 1-680 State Route 84 Intraregional Routes Sycamore Valley Road Danville Boulevard Camino Tassajara Crow Canyon Road San Ramon Valley Boulevard Bollinger Canyon Road Alcosta Boulevard Dougherty Road Tassajara Road Dublin Boulevard San Ramon Road Hopyard Road Santa Rita Road Vasco Road Crow Canyon Road Stanley Boulevard Stoneridge Drive Sunol Boulevard First Street (Livermore) Vasco Road Fallon Road North Canyons Parkway Isabel Extension North Livermore Avenue West Las Positas Boulevard Bernal Avenue Jack London Boulevard Hacienda Drive Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSO's) MTSO's represent quantifiable performance measures that are to be maintained or met within a specific timeframe. With the exception of SR-84, the measures from the 1995 Plan and 2000 Plan Update have been carried forward into the 2008 Plan Update as follows: · Peak Hour Travel Speed - This measure applies to 1-580 and 1-680 and sets a minimum average speed for the AM and PM peak hours of 30 mph. · Delay Index (DI) ~ This measure is defined as the ratio between the time required to travel between two points during the peak hour and the time required to travel between the same two points during an off-peak, non-congested hour. The objective for 1-580 and 1-680 is 2.0 or less. In other words, it would take no more than twice as long during the peak hour to travel on these routes than during an off-peak hour. The objective for SR-84 is 3.0 or less. · Duration of Congestion - This measure is expressed in terms of the amount of time of congestion, as determined by travel speeds or traffic counts. The objective for the southern gateway ofI-680 (south of SR-84) is five hours or less. · Intersection Levels of Service - As determined using the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Level of Service (CCTALOS) method, level of service should be calculated for the AM and PM peak hours. The objective is to maintain Level of Service (LOS) D at signalized intersections on Routes of Regional Significance. · Mode Split - This is typically measured through extensive home interview and work place surveys. The U.S. Census collects this data every ten years. Transit ridership may be monitored as an alternate means for determining whether more transit trips are occurring. The goal is to have an increasing amount of transit ridership. Page 5 of? · Average Vehicle Ridership - This measure is the ratio of total person commute trips to vehicles used for commuting. The plan calls for a regional increase from 1.1 to 1.2. Inability to achieve the MTSO's does not itself constitute non-compliance with the Contra Costa GMP. Exceedance does suggest, however, that the Action Plan may need to be re-evaluated to determine whether the MTSO's should be adjusted or whether new actions should be introduced. Implementation Actions Actions are the specific actions, measures or programs that the jurisdictions in the Tri-Valley agree to in order to achieve the MTSO's. Responsibility for carrying out the action may be at the local jurisdiction level or at the TVTC level. It should be noted that Alameda County jurisdictions are not required to carry out these actions since they are not aiming to receive funding from CCT A for GMP compliance. The major actions identified in the 2008 Plan Update include: 1-680 . Complete auxiliary lanes . Test High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes . Extend HOV system . Expand 1-680 Express Bus System . HOV direct access ramps 1-580 . 5th eastbound through lane . High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes . Westbound auxiliary lane . Test HOT lanes SR-84 . Widening . Grade separation/expressway operation . Interchange reconstruction Transit . West Dublin BART station . Expand bus express service . Expand ACE service . Expand local bus and paratransit services . Add Park & Ride lots Arterial Routes · Extend 3 routes, including Dublin Boulevard and Stoneridge Drive · Widen 8 routes, including Dougherty Road, Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road . Rebuild 3 interchanges Programmatic · Support growth that leads to jobs-housing balance · Support transit, HOV and demand management programs to reduce vehicle trips · Support development of a seamless HOV network · Improve operational efficiency of freeways and arterial streets through corridor management · Work to find stable funding for existing and expanded programs Page 6 of? Subree:ional Transportation Mitie:ation Proe:ram Transportation improvement projects are funded through local development impact fees and County-wide sales tax revenues, such as those collected through Measure B in Alameda County and Measure J in Contra Costa County. Additional funding is available at the regional, state and federal levels, but these sources are inadequate to address the future needs in the Tri-Valley. As such, the TVTC created a Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) in 1998. Member jurisdictions entered into a Joint Exercise Powers Agreement(JEPA) that established the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF). A TVTDF Strategic Expenditure Plan was also created to set project priorities and timelines for project delivery. An Updated Tri-Valley Nexus Study Report was recently approved by TVTC, which identifies the most current list of improvement projects required to mitigate future forecasted growth in the Tri-Valley and the corresponding development fees that would be needed to fully fund the improvement projects. Approval of the study is not an endorsement by TVTC to increase the existing fees. Rather, discussions over the next couple of months will be aimed at determining if and by how much the fees should be adjusted. The projects that can be funded by the TVTDF are listed below: Carried over from prior program: 1. Vasco Road Safety Phase I 2. Vasco Road Safety Phase II 3. Crow Canyon Road Safety Phase I 4. Crow Canyon Road Safety Phase II 5. 1-580 Eastbound HOV Lane 6. 1-580 Westbound HOV Lane 7. SR-84 Expressway 8. SR -84 Interchange 9. Express Bus Service 10.1-680 Auxiliary Lanes Segment 2 11. West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station 12. 1-580/ Foothill Interchange Added to the program with recently approved report: 1. 1-580/1-680 - relieve WB to SB movement 7. EI Charro Road Extension 2. 5th Eastbound 1-580 lane, Santa Rita to Vasco 8. Camino Tassajara Widening 3. 1-580/ First Street Interchange 9. Stone Valley / Danville Blvd Improvements 4. 1-580/ Vasco Road Interchange 10.1-680 HOV Lanes Livorna to North Main 5. 1-580/ Greenville Road Interchange 11.1-680 HOV Facilities / Express Bus 6. Jack London Boulevard Extension to EI Charro Development Review Procedures Development review procedures are agreements about how General Plan amendments or major development projects proposed by local jurisdictions will be reviewed to determine whether the proposal will affect the Tri-Valley's ability to meet the MTSO's. The procedures have remained unchanged from the prior Plan. Member jurisdictions must analyze the impacts of any development project that generates more than 100 peak hour trips and any General Plan amendment that generates more than 500 peak hour trips and must circulate that analysis to all the jurisdictions that make up the TVTC. The member jurisdiction should forward any regional and sub-regional transportation projects proposed as mitigation measures for the project for TVTC review and comment. Recommendation Staff recommends that the City Council receive the presentation and provide comments on the Draft Plan Update that will be documented by Staff and provided in writing to the TVTC. Page? of? ~ -~~ ~~~ .......-.;;;..=- 1 ; 1 i ' I 1'''11. ~~" ~~. _I:~ J ,~ .. \ ' ~ __ W:t. ! - .cr . ~ ~- ~.. ,', .;;y1C. -F~'~. ~~_ = .~.L...-~.__, . 4-1-08 Attachment 1 8.3 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update DRAFT Approved for Circulation by the: Tri-Valley Transportation Council Prepared by: DKS Associates TliANSPOH fA flON SOLU flONS 1000 Broadway, Suite 450 Oakland, CA 94607 (510) 763-2061 February 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTlor~s TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTR 0 D U CfI ON....... .......... ........ ........ ................ ........... ............ ................ ......... ................ 1 1.1 Overview of the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update ..........1 1.2 Elements of an Action Plan.......................................................................................... 1 1.3 The 2008 Action Plan Update...................................................................................... 2 1.4 Outline of the Document ............................................................................................. 3 2 REVIEW OF VISION, GOALS, AND POLICIES........................................................... 5 2.1 Review of Consistency with General Plans of Tri-Valley Communities .............. 5 2.2 Proposed Statements of Vision, Goals, and Policies ................................................ 6 2.3 Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives ........................................................ 7 3 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS ......................................................... 9 3.1 Routes of Regional Significance .................................................................................. 9 3.2 Traffic Volumes and Conditions............................................................................... 12 3.3 Transit Service ................ ..................................................... ................................. ....... 12 3.4 Conclusions about Existing Transportation Conditions ....................................... 21 4 OVERALL GROWTH RATES AND FUTURE TRAVEL PATTERNS ..................... 23 4.1 Population and Employment Forecasts................................................................... 23 4.2 Traffic Forecasts........................................ .................................................................. 26 4.3 Evaluation of MTSO Values for 2030 Traffic Conditions...................................... 26 5 PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND ACTION PLAN ............................29 5.1 Focus of the Transportation Plan..............................................................................29 5.2 Roadways...................... ............. ......... ....................................... .................................. 29 5.3 Transit... ................................................ ............................ ........ .................................... 38 5.4 Freight Transportation......... ............... .................................... ................................... 40 5.5 Transportation Demand Management (TOM) ....................................................... 40 5.6 Land Use and Growth Management........................................................................ 40 5.7 Additional Action Plan Actions ................................................................................ 43 6 FINANCIAL PLAN ........... ...... ........... ................. ........ ................ ........... ..... ........................ 47 6.1 Overview of the Financial Plan.................................................................................47 6.2 Subregional Transportation Impact Fee .................................................................. 48 6.3 Shared Facilities..... ........ ............................ ............... ........................ ..... ..................... 49 7 PLAN IMPLEMENT A TION, MONITORING, AND REVIEW................................. 51 7.1 Plan Adoption and Amendment .............................................................................. 51 7.2 Monitoring Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives................................. 52 7.3 Development Applications Review and General Plan Amendments ................. 53 7.4 Conflict Resolution................................ ...................... ....... ............................. ........... 55 7.5 Future Role of TVTC .................................................................................................. 56 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update Draft FebnwnJ 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Tri-Valley Routes of Regional Significance ............................................................11 Figure 2: ACE Rail System Map ............................................................................................... 13 Figure 3: Annual Ridership for ACE Rail............................................................................... 14 Figure 4: BART System Map.....................................................................................................15 Figure 5: Average Annual Weekday Exits at Select BART stations ....................................16 Figure 6: Annual Ridership for County Connection Tri-Valley Bus Routes...................... 16 Figure 7: County Connection System Map (Tri-Valley area) ...............................................18 Figure 8: LA VT A System Map.................................................................................................. 19 Figure 9: Annual Ridership for LA VTA Bus Routes ............................................................. 20 Figure 10: Annual System Wide Para transit Ridership ....................................................... 21 Figure 11: Household Growth by Area, 2007 to 2030............................................................ 24 Figure 12: Employment Growth by Area, 2007 to 2030 ........................................................ 25 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Current Interregional Routes of Regional Significance .............................................9 Table 2: Current Intraregional Routes of Regional Significance.............................................9 Table 3: Status of MTSOs .................................................................................................. ..........12 Table 4: Population and Employment Forecast ......................................................................23 Table 5: Population Forecast by Age Group............................................................................24 Table 6: Employment Forecast............... ................................................................................... .24 Table 7: Traffic Forecasts for Select Routes of Regional Significance...................................26 Table 8: Status of MTSOs............................................................................ ............................... .28 Table 9: Programmed Projects for the Tri-Valley Interregional Routes of Regional Significance........................................ ............ ......... .............................. .................. ..35 Table 10: Programmed Projects for the Tri-Valley Intraregional Routes of Regional Significance............ ...... ............ ..................... ......... .... ...... ...... .......... ........ .37 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update ii Draft FebnwnJ 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Overview of the Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update The 2008 Update to the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan/ Action Plan assesses transporta- tion issues within the Tri-Valley area and outlines a recommended package of vision statements, goals, policies, objectives and actions for addressing those issues. The study area includes Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, and unincorporated portions of Contra Costa County and Alameda County. In addition to serving as a guide for transportation planning through 2030, the Plan also represents the Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance for Contra Costa County jurisdictions, as mandated by Measures C and J, and provides information that can be incorporated into the Conges- tion Management Programs for Contra Costa and Alameda Counties. As the Action Plan for the Tri-Valley, many of the Plan's recommendations and goals will be incorporated into the 2008 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transpor- tation Plan prepared by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority. In addition, the Tri- Valley Transportation Council (TVTC) joint powers agreement states that member juris- dictions are to consider the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan when adopting or amending general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances, or capital improvement programs. The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan is intended to be congruent with, and does not override, existing policies, agreements, and regulations that exist in each jurisdiction or between jurisdictions. This report documents the 2008 update of the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan. In 1995, the TVTC developed and adopted the first Transportation Plan and Action Plan. This planning document served as a guide for Tri-Valley transportation planning through 2010 and, for Contra Costa County jurisdictions, as the Measure C mandated Action Plan. The Action Plan underwent a focused update in 2000. Since then, new demographic, land use, and travel forecast data has become available. Measure J was passed in Contra Costa, and statewide Proposition 1B was approved, and MTC updated its Regional Transportation Plan. All of these events combined have triggered the need to revisit the Tri-Valley Transportation and Action Plan to reflect changes in traffic, fi- nance and policy. 1.2 Elements of an Action Plan In 1988, Contra Costa County voters approved Measure C, a one-half percent sales tax that generated $1 billion in funding over 20 years. Measure C also included an innova- tive Growth Management Program (GMP) that encouraged local jurisdictions to partici- pate in a cooperative, multi-jurisdictional planning process, and, among other things, Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update Draft FebrunnJ 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS establish flexible traffic service standards for Regional Routes. In November 2004, Meas- ure J was passed by the voters of Contra Costa, extending the sales tax program and the GMP for another 25 years. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority, created to man- age this program, allocates 18 percent of the sales tax revenue it receives to local jurisdic- tions that comply with Measure C and J Growth Management Program requirements. To receive these funds, each Contra Costa jurisdiction must, among other requirements, participate in an ongoing cooperative, multi-jurisdictional planning process. As a part of this process, "Action Plans for Routes of Regional Significance" are to be developed by the Regional Transportation Planning Committees (RTPC) with input from local juris- dictions. The TVTC, composed of elected officials from the seven member jurisdictions, serves as the RTPC for the Tri-Valley sub-regional area. Each Action Plan must: 1) Identify Routes of Regional Significance, 2) Set Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSOs), and 3) Establish Actions for meeting those MTSOs and local responsibilities for carrying them out In addition, local jurisdictions and the RTPCs are to establish thresholds that trigger the evaluation of the impacts of major developments and General Plan amendments for their effects on the local and regional transportation system and the ability to achieve the MTSOs established in the Action Plan. 1.3 The 2008 Action Plan Update The 2008 Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update focuses on updating the growth management components to the plan that are required for the Contra Costa jurisdictions to comply with the Measure C and J GMP. In addition, changes have been reflected for the Alameda jurisdictions with regard to new project priorities and funding opportunities. During the course of the 2008 Update, the TVTC reviewed and updated several major elements of the Action Plan including the Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies; Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives; Actions; the Subregional Trans- portation Impact Fee; and Development Review Procedures. The TVTC carried forward the designated network of Routes of Regional Significance from the 2000 Plan without revision. Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies of an Action Plan help guide its overall direc- tion. Decisions regarding investments, program development, and development ap- provals are based on these policies. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 2 Draft FebnwnJ 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Routes of Regional Significance are roadways that carry significant through traffic, connect two or more jurisdictions, serve major transportation hubs, or cross county lines. For these roadways the RTPCs use the Action Plan to establish quantifiable performance measures called MTSOs Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSOs) represent quantifiable per- formance measures that are to be maintained or met within a specific timeframe. This may include, for example, average peak-hour speeds, peak-period congestion duration, roadway level of service, transit loading, or transit service frequency. MTSOs can also represent targets for system performance such as transit ridership, mode shares, or aver- age vehicle occupancy. Actions are the specific actions, measures, or programs that the jurisdictions in Tri- Valley agree to in order to achieve the MTSOs. The responsibility of carrying out the ac- tions may be at the local jurisdiction level or at the RTPC level. Actions may involve im- plementing specific projects at the local level, or they may call for the RTPC to support region-wide projects that have a local impact. (Note: Contra Costa jurisdictions are re- quired to carry out these actions in order to be found in compliance with the Measure C/J GMP). Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) is the regional transportation fee program adopted by TVTC to generate revenues to fund transportation improve- ments within the Tri-valley that are necessary to mitigate the impact of new growth. Development Review Procedures are agreements about how General Plan amendments or major development projects proposed by local jurisdictions will be reviewed by the jurisdictions and TVTC to determine whether the development proposal adversely af- fects the ability to meet the adopted MTSO. 1.4 Outline of the Document Chapter 2 of this document describes the review of statements of vision, goals and poli- cies that was undertaken and presents a revised set of statements to guide the 2008 Transportation Plan and Action Plan. Chapter 3 provides a description of the existing transportation conditions in the Tri-Valley. This chapter identifies the Routes of Re- gional Significance and the updated MTSOs. An assessment of the MTSOs from 2006 and 2007 monitoring is used to indicate the current status of the Tri-Valley with respect to the Action Plan. A forecast of future population, employment and transportation conditions is presented in Chapter 4 for the year 2030. In this chapter an assessment of the MTSOs for the Routes of Regional Significance is provided for the 2030 forecast for a baseline condition that assumes that only currently funded transportation improvements are in place. Tri- Valley Transportation Plnn and Action Plan Update 3 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Chapter 5 of the report defines the key elements of the 2008 Transportation Plan and Ac- tion Plan. This includes an updated description of the Transportation Plan elements and the actions defined by the Action Plan Update to maintain the MTSOs for the Routes of Regional Significance. The actions include "regional significant actions' designed to im- prove conditions throughout the Tri-Valley and actions specifically designed to address needs on individual Routes of Regional Significance. For each action, the agency or agencies responsible for implementing the action is identified. The financial plan for meeting the needs of the Transportation Plan and Action Plan is presented in Chapter 6. This includes a brief description of the existing funding sources that support the transportation plan elements and the Subregional Traffic Impact Fee Program designed to implement "regional significant projects" in the Action Plan. Chapter 6 also provides a description of an agreement for cost sharing for transportation improvements that are necessary to mitigate the impact of development in more than one jurisdiction. Chapter 7 provides guidance on implementation of the Transportation Plan and Action Plan. The chapter includes a description of the process for Plan adoption and amend- ment. It defines a process and schedule for monitoring and reporting the MTSOs. The chapter defines the agreed-upon procedures for review of developments and General Plan Amendments. The chapter provides a method for conflict resolution and identifies the future role of the TVTC in monitoring, implementing and updating the Transporta- tion Plan and Action Plan. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 4 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 2 REVIEW OF VISION, GOALS, AND POLICIES 2.1 Review of Consistency with General Plans of Tri-Valley Commu- nities The 2008 Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update began with a review of the state- ments of vision, goals and policies that had been developed in prior Transportation Plans/ Action Plans. The statements of vision, goals and objectives of the 1995 Action Plan had been retained in the 2000 Action Plan Update but two new statements were added. 1995 ACTION PLAN VISIONS, GOALS, AND POLICIES . Manage congestion and enhance mobility Encourage alternatives to single occupant vehicles Integrate planning with air quality, community character, and other environ- mental factors . . ADDITIONAL VISIONS, GOALS, AND POLICIES IN THE 2000 AC- TION PLAN UPDATE . Increase vehicle occupancy, transit, and TOM programs Support corridor management and incident management programs . The review of statements of vision, goals and policies began with a review of their con- sistency with the General Plans of the Tri-Valley communities. Within the General Plans, four main transportation themes form a common thread: Minimize arterial congestion and delays. All of the cities call for minimizing ar- terial congestion and delays in one form or another to provide II an efficient trans- portation system" and "acceptable levels of service". One or more of the cities mention transportation demand management, increasing vehicle occupancy, in- creasing transit use, and undertaking physical and operational improvements in order to achieve this goal. Encourage alternative modes of transportation. To achieve an efficient transpor- tation system with minimal congestion, encouraging alternative modes of trans- portation was recognized as a policy for all of the cities. Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit improvements are supported in order to meet this goal, as are mixed-use developments. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 5 Draft Febnlllnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIOr~S Increase livability. Tri-Valley communities expressed concern for livability is- sues such as residential neighborhood traffic and pedestrian environments in their General Plans. Traffic calming, improved arterial operations and improved safety were top priorities to increase livability. Support integrated regional planning. Most of the Tri-Valley communities spe- cifically cite regional planning or the Action Plan as a priority to be involved with and support. 2.2 Proposed Statements of Vision, Goals, and Policies Based on the review of consistency with the General Plans of the Tri-Valley communities and a preliminary assessment of forecasted growth in the Tri-Valley, a revised set of statements of vision, goals and policies was developed. They are as follows: 1. Integrate transportation planning with planning for air quality, community char- acter and other environmental factors. 2. Support corridor management programs to make the most efficient, effective and safe use of existing facilities and services. 3. Support incident management programs to maintain mobility when accidents or breakdowns occur on major transportation facilities. 4. Consider both the need for vehicular mobility and congestion reduction, and such livability concepts as walkability, bicycle access and community character. 5. Maintain and actively pursue expanded transit, ride sharing and non-motorized mode options and trip reduction programs to increase accessibility, to increase the transit share of travel in the Tri-Valley and to increase average vehicle occu- pancy. 6. Manage school-related traffic to enhance safety and reduce peak period traffic impacts. 7. Classify the Routes of Regional Significance as either interregional or intrare- gional in order to recognize the different trip types served on each Route. Inter-. regional Routes provide linkages between the Tri-Valley and other sub-areas and include 1-680, 1-580, SR-84, Vasco Road, and Crow Canyon Road. Intraregional Routes connect communities within the Tri-Valley and include all other Routes of Regional Significance. 8. Maintain established MTSOs on routes of regional significance. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 6 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 9. Maintain established capacity constraints to limit interregional traffic at Tri- Valley gateways on 1-580,1-680, Crow Canyon Road, and Vasco Road. 10. Encourage through-trips and interregional travel to stay on interregional routes and discourage diversion of these trips to intraregional routes as a mechanism for ensuring intraregional mobility. 11. Support arterial traffic management strategies that address hotspots at critical in- tersections and approaches. 12. Respect past regional commitments in the prioritization of funding of projects. 13. Work cooperatively with regional transportation partners to maximize funding opportunities. 2.3 Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives provide a mechanism for the jurisdictions within the Tri-Valley to define the quality of service that is desired on their Routes of Regional Significance. A combination of measures were defined in the 1995 Transporta- tion Plan/ Action Plan and retained in the 2000 update. With the exception of link vol- ume v / c ratio 1, the following performance measures are carried forward in the 2008 Update: Peak Hour Travel Speed. This measure, applied only to 1-580 and 1-680, sets a minimum average peak hour speed for the AM and PM peak hours. Delay Index. The Delay Index compares the time required to travel between two points during the peak hour to the time required during non-congested, off-peak hours. This measure is defined as the observed travel time divided by the free-flow travel time: Delay Index (DI) = (Observed Travel Time).;- (Free-Flow Travel Time) The minimum value for the Delay Index, which indicates no delay, is 1.0. A 01 of 1.0 in- dicates that traffic is moving at free-flow speed, as measured by floating car runs, un- constrained by congestion. As congestion increases and average speed decreases, the 01 increases as well. For example, a 01 of 2.0 indicates that the trip takes twice as long dur- ing peak hours as during the off-peak, due to congestion and slow speed. A link volume vlc ratio is defined as the volume, whether observed or forecast, of traffic on a roadway link divided by its capacity. This measure was applied to SR 84 in the 1995 and 2000 TVTC Plan; it was replaced by a delay index MTSO in the 2008 Update. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 7 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Duration of Congestion. This MTSO is expressed in terms of hours of congestion. Hours of congestion can be measured with traffic counts or speed runs and should apply to mixed-flow lanes only. Intersection Levels of Service. Intersection levels of service should be calculated using the CCT ALOS method for AM and PM peak hours based on turning-movement counts. The previous action plans have used a link level of service measure as the MTSO for SR 84 but this has been changed to a combination of the Delay Index used for the freeways and the intersection level of service used for the other arterials. The previous versions of the Transportation Plan and Action Plan have also identified goals for reducing reliance on the automobile. These goals provide input for the plan- ning process but are not used in the evaluation of performance on the Routes of Re- gional Significance. Mode Split. Mode split is generally measure through extensive home interview and work place surveys. These data are available every decade from the u.s. Census and pe- riodically from MTC. In between times, transit ridership may be monitored as a surro- gate for mode split, however, field measurement of mode split through observation of traffic levels is not feasible. The mode split goal of the TVTP can only be met if transit ridership increases over the reporting period. The transit operators routinely collect and report annual ridership. Average Vehicle Ridership. This MTSO is the ratio of total person commute trips to ve- hicles used for commuting. The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan includes a regional ac- tion to increase A VR from 1.1 to 1.2. Several Tri-Valley jurisdictions maintain voluntary employer trip reduction programs to increase A YR. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 8 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOlUTIOr~S 3 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION CONDITIONS 3.1 Routes of Regional Significance Three state highways provide access to and from the Tri-Valley. These highways include Interstate 680, Interstate 580, and SR 84. In addition, a number of arterial roadways fa- cilitate travel within the Tri- Valley, connecting individual cities as well as carrying local traffic. The three state highways, along with numerous arterials together make up what are known as Routes of Regional Significance, as shown in Tables 1 and 2 and in Fig- ure 3. These routes have been further classified as either interregional or intraregional in order to recognize the different trip types served on each route. Interregional routes pro- vide linkages between the Tri-Valley and other sub-areas and include 1-580, 1-680, SR 84, Vasco Road and Crow Canyon Road. Intraregional routes connect communities within the Tri-Valley and include all other Routes of Regional Significance. Table 1: Current Interregional Routes of Regional Significance Interregional Route 1-580 1-680 State Route 84 VascO Road Crow Canyon Road Table 2: Current Intraregional Routes of Regional Significance Intraregional Routes Sycamore Valley Road Danville Boulevard Camino Tassajara Crow Canyon Road San Ramon Valley Boulevard Bollinger Canyon Road Alcosta Boulevard Dougherty Road T assajara Road Stanley Boulevard Stoneridge Drive Sunol Boulevard First Street (Livermore) Vasco Road Fallon Road North Canyons Parkway Isabel Extension North Livermore Avenue 9 Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Intraregional Routes Dublin Boulevard San Ramon Road Hopyard Road Santa Rita Road West Las Positas Boulevard Bernal A venue Jack London Boulevard Hacienda Drive All freeways and many major arterials are designated as Routes of Regional Signifi- cance, but it is up to the individual RTPC to establish these routes for incorporation into the Authority's Countywide Plan. In general, Routes of Regional Significance are routes that meet the following four criteria: 1. Connect two or more subareas; 2. Cross county boundaries; 3. Carry a significant amount of through traffic; or 4. Provide access to a regional highway or transit facility (e.g. A BART station or freeway interchange). Last updated in 2000, many arterials were designated as "potential future routes", shown as dotted lines in Figure 3. Changing the classification of these roadways from "potential" to "designated" Routes of Regional Significance requires unanimous agree- ment by TVTC. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 10 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 1: Tri- Valley Routes of Regional Significance I..,;.. ""'_ \;;;\. L1fayeIT~ I.~ Walnut Cr~k f.. i 'd ( >- '\ Moraga " ,I " " -.J f-.. ...-..-..- .,N1'{---,;fq-- CO~-'--CO\l r 9~1P~\"f\) I' _,...~>' ;-\.,1'- -O;9~ .- ... .' . i. ::- -.~, l "~ /': I i: p""\...... : IW i .~~ - f i .I ,'- .Ii I C"Q'.C~bC"l!1n1ft IDP..-.:.,oIbp&&l ~llIC' __ PoZltlllf.mlnl'_ A--...C".r:r b.m(~ Tri-\"~) _'..Jl:llftotlllpoul~. __ )lo~~~ ,r- .C: 1. OQcLocal~. " I' II if :1 n"TC !>w.u.~\iU.,. S"'~.L.aao::.a.t.l ':J.A.'\VAC :u.'''SPL.A-''l t;q( (, Tri- Valley Trmlsportation Plan and A ction Plan Update 11 Dmft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SO UTIO~JS 3.2 Traffic Volumes and Conditions An evaluation of the values of the MTSOs for the Routes of Regional Significance pro- vides an overview of the existing traffic conditions in the Tri-Valley. Most of the MTSOs were met during the most recent monitoring efforts in 2006 and 2007. Table 3 summa- rizes the results of the monitoring. Table 3: Status of MTSOs MTSO Standard Facilities 2006 and 2007 Monitoring Peak Hour Minimum average 1-680 Met overall in AM and PM Travel Speeds speed of 30 miles per but not met for one hour segment NB in PM ------ 1-580 Met overall but not met for one segment WB in AM and one EB in PM Delay Index Delay index of 2.0 or 1-680 Met overall in AM and PM less but not met for one segment NB in AM and NB in PM 1-580 Met overall but not met for two segments WB in AM and one EB in PM Congestion No more than 5 hours 1-680 Met Duration of congestion south of SR-84 Link Volume-to- Link V fe ratio less SR-84 Met in all but one segment Capacity Ratio than 0.99 Intersection LOS 0 (V fC > 0.90) at 26 Arterials Met for all intersections Level of Service signalized except for two in AM and intersections three in PM Source: 2007 CCT A MTSO Monitoring Report, 2006 ACCMA LOS Monitoring Report 3.3 Transit Service Transit service in the Tri-Valley is provided by the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE Rail), the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), County Connection, and the Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LA VT A). In general, transit rider- Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plall Update 12 Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS ship has been slowly recovering after a decline during the years following the economic downturn of 2000-2001. In particular, Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) Rail, BART, and LA VT A are showing an increase in ridership while County Connection ridership is holding steady. Providing commuter rail service from Stockton to San Jose, ACE Rail serves the Tri- Valley with one stop in Livermore and another at Pleasanton. Service began in 1998 and has since expanded to 4 round-trip trains. The complete route and stations served is shown in Figure 4. Similar to LA VT A, ACE Rail ridership has begun to recover after last peaking in 2001. Figure 5 shows the ridership trends since 1998. Figure 2: ACE Rail System Map ~ [@3 VallejO O~ San ,I [I, Rafael 0 ..... ~ ... OCollcord Berkoley ~(1hllll Creek o ~ >aklaml - ~ U SfOC~.tOJl P r\ C./ F / C ~ Lathrop-Manteca "j. San Francisco ~ ..to[~'41 "'5' . c ~lo(leSf( , ~ o C E 1\ N Sill U Iyvale 0 I","~"['h'.f -~ll1l1l:..r-.l."t~I~t1r;F.'1 .... '"'f':. "11':.--.11 F.l7:1I ....~II.~1 v 20 miles L n. (@J Source: http:! jwww.acerail.com. September 2007 Tri- Valle1) Transportation Plan mzd Action Plan Update 13 Draft Februan} 26, 2008 .... OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 3: Annual Ridership for ACE Rail 1.000.000 900.000 800.000 700.000 c. ~ 600.000 f CI> "tl ii2 500,000 iij :s 400,000 c c <( 300.000 200.000 100.000 0 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Calendar Year Source: 2006 MTC Statistical Summary of Bay Area Transit Operators. BART service to the Tri-Valley is provided at the DublinfPleasanton BART station. The station can be accessed through an on-site park-and-ride lot and through numerous County Connection and LA VT A bus routes. A map showing the BART system is pre- sented in Figure 6. Ridership in the form of average annual weekday exits at the Dub- linfPleasanton station, along with the nearby Walnut Creek and Castro Valley stations is shown in Figure 7. The most apparent trend is a significant increase in ridership, espe- cially at the DublinfPleasanton station, since FY 2003. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plall Update 14 Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 4: BART System Map "\ . \"0- . (. \. "-- ~ / htt~:/twww.Jart.gov .. Ilol ' , I \ Ric~nd EI Cerrito del Norte L.J. "'" EI Cenito Plaza _...:\ North Downtowll\ '-Berkeley Berkeley~ Ashby-1L West.., \ - Oaklandi.; ~ '- PIttsbu Bay Point North Concordl Martinez "'- Walnut Creek Lafayette OrInc1a .. I Embercadero Montgomery St / Powel15t CIvic Center ockridge MacArthur(f,.,.. -.) 19th StlOaldand OsJdand City Centerl12th St(f_llIoIIon) l.ak8 Merritt Frultvale CoIiseurn' Oakland Airport , '-.. :" Dublin! Pleasanton San Francisco lmemational - Airport (SFO) t iC 2L BART j .J 5" Source: http:j jwww.bart.gov, September 2007 County Connection serves the Contra Costa County portion of Tri-Valley as well as the DublinfPleasanton BART station and the Alameda County Fairgrounds ACE train sta- tion. The bus routes currently serving this area are 121, 135, 221, 920, 960, and 970. Rid- ership on the Tri-Valley area routes has increased over FY 2006 and is approaching 2004 and 2005 levels as shown in Figure 8. Figure 9 identifies the locations of these routes. Route 259 was recently discontinued in January 2005 while Route 135 started in Decem- ber 2006. Tri- Valley Transportation Plall and Action Plan Update 15 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 ..... OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 5: Average Annual Weekday Exits at Select BART stations 8,000 1,000 7,000 .!I 6,000 ;c ~ 5,000 '" "'0 ~ t 4,000 3: ~ 3,000 E .. > < 2,000 o FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Year _ Dublin/Pleasanton _ Walnut Creek 0 Castro Valley Source: BART 2007 Ridership Report Figure 6: Annual Ridership for County Connection Tri-Valley Bus Routes 800.000 700.000 600,000 a. :c 500,000 Ie .. "'0 ii: 400,000 OJ ::J C 300.000 c < 200,000 100,000 0 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 FY 2007 Year Source: County Connection, August 2007 . Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 16 Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates T fl A N S P 0 R TAT ION SOL IJ T I 0 r~ s In the Alameda County portion of Tri-Valley, LAVTA is the primary transit provider serving Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore with local and express bus services, as illus- trated in Figure 10. LA VT A provides 11 fixed local services, one express service, four shuttle services (servicing BART, ACE and the Santa Rita Jail) and demand-responsive para transit service. Between 2005 and 2006, ridership for LA VT A, presented in Figure 11, shows a sharp increase in ridership that had previously peaked in FY 2001. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 17 Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 7: County Connection System Map (Tri-Valley area) ''"'. I.\" ';c.- ...~ ...., ....../.. ....,.. .. .....::.. ~ '. Il.\NVII.I..: o. ...~~ :=. ..:..............~:f...\ J'i h.__ JtrI.! ......... .I/- iY.... ,JO.......... .............. Iw4 =:..........l S.\1\ I(,\\ION ....,. ...., ...- '....,..... ,.....,.,..w,., ,,......,.,, Source: http:j /www.cccta.org, September 2007 ".. .:.::. ';-. Tri- Valley Trmlsportation Plan and Action Plan Update Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 18 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 8: LA VT A System Map t { I --=IS ~.. == , I ~.~ to \. !5- ~..... e:- _.~~ ~~-~ , :<< zlr.ln& J::",,: t..~"- '-..: pro- Source: http:j /www.lavta.or~ September 2007 Tri-Vallet} Transportation Plan and Actio" Plan Update 19 Draft Febntan} 26,2008 - OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 9: Annual Ridership for LA VT A Bus Routes 2,500,000 500,000 2,000,000 Cl. :c l!! 1.500,000 .. '0 ii1 ii ~ 1,000,000 c < o FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Year Source: 2006 MTC Statistical Summary of Bay Area Transit Operators. Para transit services within the Tri-Valley are provided by both County Connection and LA VT A. Ridership on Para transit, shown in Figure 12, has been steadily rising, mirror- ing a trend found throughout the Bay Area. With population forecasts showing a large increase in the senior (age 62 and over) demographic, the rising demand for Para transit is a trend that is expected to continue. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 20 Draft Febnwn} 26,2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Figure 10: Annual System Wide Paratransit Ridership 180.000 160.000 140,000 ~ 120.000 l!! Gl 100.000 " if fti 80,000 :J C c 60,000 <( 40,000 20,000 0 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004 FY 2005 FY 2006 Year I [!J County Connection. LA VTA Wheels I Source: 2006 MTC Statistical Summary of Bay Area Transit Operators 3.4 Conclusions about Existing Transportation Conditions . Looking back at the original Action Plan adopted by TVTC in 1995, it is striking to note that the Plan indicated that there was very little congestion on the Tri-Valley's arterial and freeway network. Today, we see not only significant congestion, but also continued rapid growth that is expected to cause still greater levels of traffic congestion in the fu- ture. To continue to meet the MTSOs, new actions and measures may be required. It is important to note, however, that inability to achieve the MTSOs does not of itself consti- tute non-compliance with the Contra Costa GMP. Exceedance of an MTSO does, how- ever, suggest that the Action Plan may need to be re-evaluated to determine whether the MTSOs needs to be adjusted, or whether new actions can be introduced to address the exceedance. Transit is playing an important role in the region, but transit ridership is not growing at as fast a rate as population, employment or traffic volumes. In fact, forecasts indicate a continued reliance on the single-occupant auto as the dominant mode of transit in the Tri-Valley. If the Tri-Valley is to continue to seek to meet its transportation objectives by increasing transit use and increasing vehicle occupancy, more resources will be required to increase transit service to the point where it is sufficiently attractive to achieve a higher transit mode share and higher vehicle occupancies. More resources will also be Tri- Valley Trmlsportation Plan and Action Plan Update 21 Draft Februan) 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS needed to enhance other alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle such as carpooling, vanpooling, bicycling and walking. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 22 Draft Febnllln} 26,2008 OKS Associates THANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 4 OVERALL GROWTH TRAVEL PATTERNS RATES AND FUTURE 4.1 Population and Employment Forecasts Forecasts for future population and employment levels in the Tri-Valley were derived from the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's (CCTA) Countywide travel demand forecasting model. By resolution, this model was adopted by the TVTC in 2006 as the replacement for the previous Tri-Valley Model. The traffic forecasts generated by the model are based on the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Projections 2005, and the subsequent 2006 CCTA Land Use Information System (LUIS '06), which was ex- tensively reviewed and refined by the Tri-Valley local jurisdictions. The model is capa- ble of generating forecasts for the year 2000, 2010, 2020, and 2030. Current year 2007 es- timates are derived through straight-line interpolation between 2000 and 2010. Population and employment forecasts are summarized in Tables 4 and 5. By 2030, the total Tri-Valley population is forecasted to grow 57 percent from today. Seniors (age 62 and over) are to make up most of that growth, more than tripling in number. The total number of employees, or jobs, in the Tri-Valley is expected to grow at a similar rate as the number of employed residents. Since there are currently more employees than employed residents, the net in-commuting travel pattern that exists today will likely continue. Table 4: Population and Employment Forecast Total Population Total Household Population Total Households Total Employed Residents Total Employees Average Household Size Employed ResidentsfHH 2007 330,973 327,189 118,749 172,675 202,110 2.76 1.45 2030 520,649 456,064 165,853 270,075 314,261 2.75 1.63 Net Growth Percent Growth 189,676 128,875 47,104 97,400 112,151 57% 39% 40% 56% 55% Source: CCT A Travel Demand Model, Projections 2005 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 23 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Table 5: Population Forecast by Age Group Percent 2007 2030 Net Growth Growth Senior (Age 62+) 38,938 119,839 80,902 208% Adult (Non-Senior) 227,328 318,195 90,867 40% Non-working Young 64,708 82,615 17,907 28% Total Population 330,973 520,649 189,676 57% Source: CCT A Travel Demand Model, Projections 2005 Of the total household growth in the Tri-Valley, approximately 60 percent of it is ex- pected to occur in Dublin, Pleasanton, and Livermore as shown in Figure 11. The com- munities of Alamo, Blackhawk, Danville, and San Ramon are forecasted to absorb 15 percent of the total growth while the other 25 percent is to occur in the remaining areas of Contra Costa and Alameda counties. Figure 11: Household Growth by Area, 2007 to 2030 14,000 12.000 10,000 j 8,000 . ~ 6,000 :t: 4,000 2,000 0 Alamo- Danville Blackhawk Dublin Livermore Pleasanlon San Ramon eee Ae Remainder Remainder City Source: CCT A Travel Demand Model, Projections 2005 Total employment is forecasted to grow 55 percent in the Tri-Valley by 2030 as shown in Table 6. Most of this growth is to occur in the service sector which will account for over 40 percent of the total employment growth. Table 6: Employment Forecast Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 24 Draft Febmanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Net Percent . 2007 2030 Growth Growth Retail 36,757 58,922 22,164 60% Service 86,590 132,280 45,691 53% Manufacturing 20,046 32,465 12,419 62% Agricultural 1,669 2,452 784 47% Wholesale 9,721 14,862 5,141 53% Other 47,327 73,279 25,952 55% Total Employment 202,110 314,261 112,151 55% Source: CCT A Travel Demand Model, Projections 2005 Distribution of employment growth is not expected to be even, with Dublin and Liver- more accounting for over 60 percent of the additional Tri-Valley jobs as presented in Figure 12. Figure 12: Employment Growth by Area, 2007 to 2030 45,000 40,000 o 35,000 30,000 c E 25,000 >- o ~ 20,000 w 15,000 10,000 5,000 Alamo. Blackhawk Dam.1l1e Dublin U\ermore Pleasanton San Ramon eee Ae Remainder Remainder City Source: CCT A Travel Demand Model, Projections 2005 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 25 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUflONS 4.2 Traffic Forecasts As shown in Table 7, traffic demand is expected to grow at a brisk pace along Tri-Valley area freeways and arterials. Most of the percentage growth is found along arterial road- ways that, in 2000, were mostly serving undeveloped land but will be serving residential development in the future (or even already today). Table 7: Traffic Forecasts for Select Routes of Regional Significance Road Name 2000 PM Peak Volume / Peak Direction 2000 - 2030 PM Peak Volume % Growth 1-680 (North of Diablo Road) 8440 9% 1-680 (South of SR-84) 7600 34% 1-580 (West of 1-680) 7100 45% 1-580 (East of Tassajara Road) 8750 16% 1-580 (East of Vasco Road) 7050 37% Vasco Road (At County Line) 840 65% Vallecitos Road (East of 1-680) 1050 96% Stanley Blvd (West of Isabel Avenue) 1980 6% Bollinger Canyon Road (At Dougherty 760 233% Road) Crow Canyon Road (at Dougherty Road) 670 109% Camino Tassajara Road (at Crow Canyon 1410 41% Road) Source: CCT A Travel Demand Model, Projections 2005 4.3 Evaluation of MTSO Values for 2030 Traffic Conditions As indicated in Table 8, the growth in traffic that is expected in the Tri-Valley will result in a significant deterioration in MTSO performance despite a significant investment in transportation projects and service (see Chapter 5 for assumed projects that are already Tri- Valley Transportation Plan Ilnd Action Plan Update 26 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOl.UfIONS programmed.) The forecast also reflects a doubling of transit ridership in the Tri-Valley and an increase in the peak period transit mode share from about 8% to about 12%. We note, however, that historically, the model has tended towards over-predicting transit ridership for the Bay Area.2 These results suggest that additional actions beyond the al- ready programmed projects will be needed to meet the goals and objectives of the plan. By way of example, MTC's regional model, upon which the Countywide Model is based, consistently over-predicted transit ridership in the 2001 Regional Transportation Plan. Al- though MTC's model predicted a more-than 15 percent increase in transit ridership between 2000 and 2005, actual ridership in the Bay Area declined. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 27 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIOr'IS MTSO Table 8: Status of MTSOs Peak Hour Travel Speeds Standard Facilities Minimum average speed 1-680 of 30 miles per hour 2030 Forecasts Not met for AM NB or SB and not met for PM NB or SB 1-580 Not met for AM EB or WB and not met for PM EB Delay Index Delay index of 2.0 or less 1-680 for I-580m and 1-680 1-580 3.0 for SR 84 SR84 Not met for AM NB or SB and not met for PM NB or SB Not met for AM EB or WB and not met for PM EB Met Congestion Duration No more than 5 hours of congestion south of SR- 84 1-680 Not Met Link V olume- to-Capacity Ratio Link V fC ratio less than 0.99 SR-84 Met in all but one segment Intersection Level of Service1 LOS 0 (V fC > 0.90) at signalized intersections 26 Arterials Not met for 19 intersection in the AM and 27 intersection in the PM 1. Intersection levels of service are difficult to predict due to the number of factors that influ- ence the results such as intersection geometry and specific turning movement volumes. How- ever, the 2030 forecasts, which show a large number of intersections not meeting the level of service standard, do indicate that future travel patterns may adversely affect intersection op- erations. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 28 Draft Februanj 26,2008 OKS Associates fRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 5 PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION PLAN AND AC- TION PLAN 5.1 Focus of the Transportation Plan As with the previously adopted Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan, this Update focuses on transportation improvements within the Tri-Valley, and avoids ex- pansion of the so-called "gateways" that enter and leave the Tri-Valley. Three contribut- ing factors have led to re-affirmation of this approach. 1. Financial Constraints - Financial resources for all projects are limited. The Measure C, Measure J and Measure B sales tax programs provide substantial funding for specific projects in Tri-Valley. Other projects must compete for the relatively small pot of public funds. Developer fees, which have an upper limit, could help supplement public funds. Future sales tax or gasoline tax initiatives mayor may not be successful. 2. Physical Limitations within Corridors - Expansion of major corridors within Tri-Valley is limited due to existing development and terrain. These limitations hinder the development of transportation corridors other than the existing 1-680 and 1-580 corridors. 3. Development Patterns - Development patterns within Tri-Valley have been geared toward relatively low housing and commercial densities. These patterns are expected to continue in the future. This development pattern is impossible to serve thoroughly with transit, given realistic funding expectations. The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan uses the above policy focus to create a set of actions comprising an integrated plan. The transportation plan comprises en- hancement to roadway capacity coupled with increased transit service, control of de- mand (growth management and TOM), and acceptance of congestion in locations where it cannot be avoided. The following sections provide an overview of the plan. 5.2 Roadways The plan includes many improvement projects for freeways, interchanges, arterials, and intersections. These are all based on the reality of gateway constraints. Gateway Constraints Analysis of alternatives through the planning process showed that the TVTC's best interests would not be served by widening any of the gateways for single-occupant vehicles leading into the area. The gateways include 1-680 north and Tri- Valley Trmlsportation Plallalld Action Plall Update 29 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates tRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS south, 1-580 east and west, Crow Canyon Road to Castro Valley, and Vasco Road. Wid- ening of these gateways would leave the freeways congested, lead to more through traf- fic, and increase traffic volumes on other Tri-Valley roads. This is true because of the Tri- Valley's strategic location between San Joaquin County and the Bay Area and also be- tween Central and Eastern Contra Costa County and Santa Clara County. The implication of gateway constraints for roadway planning is that the interior free- ways and arterials should be sized to handle only what traffic can get through the gate- ways. Thus, the plan recognizes that congestion will occur for several hours each week- day at the gateways, but this will have the positive effect of metering single-occupant vehicle travel to and from the area. Within the Tri-Valley area, the road system is de- signed to function with these gateways constrained to minimize congestion. The road- way plan, when combined with a balance between jobs and housing and given expected financial constraints and forecast travel demands, produces the best conditions that can reasonably be expected. The reasons behind the gateway constraint concept are different for different gateways, as discussed below. · 1-680 North The section north of Diablo Road cannot be widened beyond the HOV lanes without overcoming several significant constraints: the widening would require additional right-of-way, construction of new retaining structures, and the costly reconstruction of existing overpasses and undercrossings, as well as increase impacts on adjoining land uses. The gateway constraint assumption recognizes these constraints. This concept should not be construed as an effort to preclude all potential solutions to mitigate increasing congestion on 1-680 be- tween Interstate 580 and SR 24. TVTC should work cooperatively with TRANS- PAC and CCT A to identify and pursue strategies that are mutually beneficial. · 1-680 South The section south of SR 84 has room to be widened, and limited widening would help accommodate and balance increased flows into this section from both 1-680 and the new SR 84 project. Accordingly, the plan recommends the addition of HOV lanes. Gateway constraints would still apply for single- occupant vehicles. · 1-580 West The topographic constraints along the Dublin Grade and the limits imposed at the 1-680/1-580 interchange make widening beyond the current four lanes prohibitively expensive. The 1997 opening of the Dublin - Pleasanton BART line provide a new alternative to vehicular use of 1-580. The Plan relies on the BART to provide needed additional capacity through the gateway. · 1-580 East (Altamont Pass) Alameda County policy, in recognition of the need to encourage shorter commuter trips and not overload Tri-Valley roads with re- gional traffic, opposes increases to capacity for single-occupant vehicles across this gateway. The gateway constraint policy also applies to Patterson Pass Road, Tesla Road and Old Altamont Road. The plan, however, includes HOV lanes, as a second-priority project, in recognition of the importance of 1-580 as a regional Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 30 Draft Febnwn} 26,2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS . facility. The Plan also relies on and supports the continuation of the recent ACE service across this gateway. Crow Canyon Road (to Castro Valley) Safety improvements are planned for this section of Crow Canyon Road, although, the TVTC supports maintaining the two-lane cross-section. Vasco Road While the TVTC supports Vasco Road remaining a two-lane road, the Plan includes safety improvements to this roadway. Any future upgrade should be done in such a manner to not preclude future accommodation of pub- lic transit or other improvements as subsequently determined appropriate. . The plan is based upon the following set of assumptions regarding gateway capacity on the freeways and major arterials that access the Tri-Valley: . 1-680 North Six lanes plus HOV lanes 1-680 South Six lanes plus HOV lanes 1-580 West Eight lanes 1-580 East (Altamont Pass) Eight lanes plus HOV lanes Crow Canyon Road (to Castro Valley) Two lanes with safety improvements Vasco Road Two lanes with safety improvements . . . . . Any departure from these assumptions would require amending the Plan. In response to the issues raised by the gateway approach, the Contra Costa Transporta- tion Authority has established a gateway constraint methodology as part of its Technical Procedures. Current gateways are established by two factors: geographic constraints and financial constraints. To some degree, the geographic constraints can be overcome through sig- nificant capital investments in new highway projects. However, the Tri-Valley Transpor- tation Plan is based upon the assumption that significant capacity enhancements to the gateways serving Tri-Valley are not financially feasible. The policy of the TVTC is to work closely with neighboring jurisdictions, Congestion Management Agencies, Cal- trans, and MTC to resolve capacity problems at the gateways and as needed through the partnership activities and to subsequently adjust Tri-Valley Transportation Plan should funding of mutually acceptable facilities become possible. Corridor Management Congestion Strategies A number of alternative strategies to adding new lanes or building new roads are available for addressing congestion. These strategies focus on improving the efficiency of traffic flow on roads, and thereby increas- ing the number of vehicles or people that can move through that corridor. The range of potential strategies is broad. They can include the addition of auxiliary lanes to free- ways, incident management programs such as the Freeway Service Patrol, changeable message signs that provide information to travelers on travel alternatives, ramp meter- ing, and support for travel alternatives such as park-and-ride lots and HOV bypass lanes Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 31 Draft Febnwnj 26,2008 OKS Associates iRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS at freeway ramps. In a sense, the gateway constraint concept is a strategy for managing the main travel corridors within the Tri-Valley. Caltrans, with support from MTC, is in the process of implementing Traffic Operations Systems (TOS) along freeway corridors within the Bay Area. These systems will provide information to travelers on accidents and other delays on freeways, alternative routes to avoid these delays, and other information to encourage traveler decisions that would improve efficient roadway operations. Ramp metering controls the volume of traffic entering a freeway so the system is as effi- cient as possible. As congestion on a freeway increases, the number of vehicles that the freeway can carry decreases. Although a single freeway lane can carry around 2,200 ve- hicles per hour under optimal conditions, as demand exceeds those optimal conditions, the volumes carried actually drop. Under congested conditions, travel lanes have been observed to carry only around 1,600-1,700 vehicles per hour. One source of this conges- tion is the "turbulence" caused by the merging of vehicles at freeway ramps. By smooth- ing out this merging, ramp metering can help make the flow of traffic on the freeway lanes more efficient and thus increase the volumes and speeds. A survey made for the Federal Highway Administration of seven ramp metering systems in the United States and Canada revealed that average highway speeds increased by 29 percent after install- ing ramp metering and travel times decreased 16.5 percent. At the same time reductions of freeway congestion averaged approximately 60 percent. An analysis of the FLOW sys- tem in Seattle (ramp metering and HOV lanes) revealed that in addition to similar im- provements in speed and travel time, highway throughput increased from 12 to 40 per- cent as a result of ramp metering. An additional benefit from ramp metering is a de- crease in the accident rate. Reductions from 20 to 58 percent have been achieved through improved merging operations. Ramp meters can also encourage the peak spreading that needs to occur to keep the gateways flowing. This happens because motorists are willing to accept only up to about a lO-minute wait at the meters. Beyond that, they will adjust their trip making (i.e., choose to travel at a different time or choose a different mode). This peak spreading helps to get the most out of the system when gateway constraints are a reality. In addition, when combined with HOV bypasses, ramp metering can provide an addi- tional powerful incentive for carpooling and can help buses increase average speeds. When combined with HOV lanes on the freeways, the ramp metering-with-bypass sys- tem allows carpools and buses to achieve real travel time advantages compared to sin- gle-occupant vehicles. Ramp metering has two potential drawbacks: backups on the local street system and rewarding long-distance commuters. The potential for backups on local streets can be minimized through ramp widening and strategic placement of the meters. Where these mitigation measures are not possible, ramp metering can significantly reduce levels of Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 32 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIOr~S service adjoining intersections and along adjacent streets. The risk of rewarding long- distance commutes can be minimized by instituting a system of ramp metering for the entire length of a freeway, rather than in isolated locations. The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan supports ramp metering with HOV bypass only where it will not seriously impact local streets and where local implementa- tion is tied with implementation along all of 1-680 and 1-580 in neighboring communities. Current Caltrans District 4 policy provides for preferential metered HOV lanes, not HOV bypass lanes. TVTC recommends that this policy be reevaluated by the District to provide maximum benefits to HOVs. Freeway HOV Lanes HOV lanes provide the advantage of reducing travel times for ridesharers and transit patrons. They also enhance mobility during off-peak hours by being available for all vehicles. This is especially important when considering truck traf- fic, which increasingly relies on off-peak hours to reach destinations without undue de- lays. The TVTC recognizes the benefits of HOV lanes, but realizes that take-a-Iane programs do not work. Such an ill-fated attempt at providing HOV lanes on 1-580 resulted in fed- eral legislation prohibiting their use on freeways in unincorporated areas, which has been only recently changed. Thus, HOV lanes must be added to the freeways. HOV lanes on both 1-680 and 1-580 are included in the plan. Due to the expense of the projects, however, some segments are included as lower priority projects. 1-680 south of 1-580 has been designed to accommodate the addition of HOV lanes, but pavement wid- ening would be required. Top funding priority should be given to the section south of SR 84 to the top of the Sunol Grade, which is the border of Area 4 in the Alameda County Transportation Plan. This section will experience significant traffic increases due to the planned capacity increases to SR 84. The section of 1-680 between Alcosta Boule- vard and SR 84 should also be planned to include HOV lanes but with a lower funding priority. On 1-580, HOV lanes would be more difficult and costly to build because the inter- changes have not been built to accommodate them. However, the Caltrans route concept report for 1-580 calls for 10 lanes plus BART in the median. The most important segment for funding priority on 1-580 is the segment between Tassajara Road and North Liver- more Avenue. This segment is predicted to experience the highest traffic demand along 1-580 in the Tri-Valley. To accommodate the extra freeway width, the interchanges at EI Charro/Fallon and Airway would need to be rebuilt. The EI Charro/Fallon interchange is planned to be rebuilt. In addition, the planned new interchange at Isabel Avenue (SR 84) would need to be built to accommodate the width. As a lower funding priority, the plan also includes extending the 1-580 HOV lanes east to the Alameda County border. This would require widening four interchanges in Livermore (N. Livermore, First, Vasco, and Greenville), and three interchanges or crossings east of Livermore. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 33 Draft Februanj 26,2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS HOV lanes on 1-580 will begin at Santa Rita Road eastbound, and will terminate west of Foothill Road for the westbound direction. With the BART extension and the 1-580/1-680 interchange project, this section will be built out to its maximum width given the physi- cal constraints of freeway structures and rights-of-way. The section will have four through lanes, as it does today, plus auxiliary lanes between interchanges. Arterial Issues The planned arterial system has been designed to provide smooth cir- culation in and between the Tri-Valley cities and to provide access to the freeway sys- tem. Intersections and freeway interchanges are the focal points of the arterial system. All of the widenings and extensions are necessary to serve new development, so the plan calls for direct developer construction or at least funding. The primary issue is how to share costs between jurisdictions having joint responsibility for a particular road. This is discussed further in the Financing Plan chapter. There are two major arterials in the Tri-Valley that do not provide direct access to planned development but rather serve interregional traffic between Alameda County and Contra Costa County. These two arterials are Crow Canyon Road and Vasco Road. Crow Canyon Road The portion of Crow Canyon Road west of Bollinger Can- yon Road is a two-lane rural road that lies within the jurisdiction of Alameda County and Contra Costa County. While once used by its adjacent residents to bring goods to the market, today Crow Canyon Road is being used by commut- ers as an alternate to the 1-580/1-680 freeways. Development in the vicinity of Crow Canyon Road, especially in the fast-growing San Ramon Valley area, has generated a significant increase in traffic on this roadway. The expected forecast for this roadway is LOS F. The roadway, which is a narrow and winding road, was not designed to handle commuter traffic and does not have adequate width or alignment. Alameda County, in collaboration with Contra Costa County and the City of San Ramon, prepared and developed a project study report, pursuant to California Senate Bill 1149. The report recommended the construction of eight-foot shoulders, climbing lanes, and road realignment eliminating short-radii curves. Contra Costa County has in its Measure C program the improvement of Crow Canyon Road within Contra Costa County. Alameda County, however, is seek- ing for funds to improve the two-lane section of the roadway. Unfortunately, improvement of this portion of Crow Canyon Road cannot be directed to a par- ticular developer construction. But since the traffic forecast clearly indicates that traffic increase on this roadway is development-related, it is recommended that sub regional transportation impact fees be used to improve the section of Crow Canyon Road within the Tri-Valley. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 34 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOUJ rlc);,.JS Vasco Road Vasco Road is a narrow and winding rural road that is a major commuter and truck route linking the Tri-Valley with eastern Contra Costa County. Approximately 17 miles of Vasco Road, starting at a point on Vasco Road approximately one-half mile south of the county line to the intersection of Camino Diablo in Contra Costa County, has been relocated as a result of the con- struction of the Los Vaqueros Reservoir. This portion of Vasco Road is designed to State and County standards. The remaining section of the roadway in Ala- meda County (approximately three miles in length) needs to be upgraded to these standards as well to improve traffic flow and safety. Alameda County is currently seeking funds to improve the section of the roadway from the new Vasco Road to the Livermore City limit. This proposed improvement includes realignment of the roadway, widening of shoulders, and installing passing lanes without increasing its capacity, consistent with the standards beings used in the Los V aqueros- Vasco Road project. Road Improvements The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan includes many road improvement projects. These projects, listed in Tables 9 and 10, were devel- oped by the member jurisdictions of the TVTC. Projects range from intersection modifi- cations to freeway improvements and new roads. Table 9: Programmed Projects for the Tri- Valley Interregional Routes of Regional Significance Project / Action Name 1-580 1-580 Eastbound j Westbound HOV Lane 5th EB 1-580 through lane, Santa Rita Rd to Vasco Rd Westbound 1-580 Aux Lane 1-680 1-680: Construct Auxiliary Lanes, Sycamore to Crow Canyon HOV over SunoI Grade (northbound) I-680jNorris Canyon Rd HOV Ramps Southbound 1-680 HOV Lane Extension Project / Action Limits Primary Sponsor T assajara Road to E. of Vasco Rd. 1-580 Eastbound: Santa Rita Road to Vasco Road Airport Blvd to Tassajara Rd Sycamore to Crow Canyon CCTA Northbound HOV lane from Fremont to Rt. 84 Interchange of 1-680 and Norris Canyon in San Ramon CCTA North Main to Livorna TRANSPAC 35 Draft Februanj 26,2008 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update OKS Associates r RAN S PO R TAIl () N SOL lJ T I 0 rJ S Project / Action Name Project / Action Limits Primary Sponsor 1-680 HOV Lane Extension Between AIcosta and south to SR 237 Caltrans Transportation Operations 1-580 to Santa Clara County Line System on 1-680 South of 1-580 1-680/Sunoll/C improvements 1-680 Southbound High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane SR-84 Isabel Parkway jSR 84 At Rt. 84 Caltrans Interchange Construct Isabel Parkway /SR 1-580 to VaIIecitos Road Caltrans 84: phase one Isabel A venue widening to From Vallecitos Rd. to Vineyard Alameda County four lanes and extension (to 1- 580) Isabel A venue widening to six From Airway Blvd. To Vineyard Ave. Livermore lanes Isabel AvenuejI-580 At Rt. 84 CaItrans interchange Phase II Isabel Avenue/SR 84/1-580: At Interstate 580 Caltrans Build Second Overcrossing Vasco Road 1-580/Vasco Road interchange 1-580 at Vasco Road Caltrans Crow Canyon Road Widening to 6 lanes AIcosta to T assajara Ranch Drive San Ramon Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 36 Draft Februanj 26,2008 OKS Associates Tr~ANSPORrAfION SOLUrlONS Table 10: Programmed Projects for the Tri-VaIley Intraregional Routes of Regional Significance Project / Action Name 1st Street 1st Street Widening 1st Street interchange Project / Action Limits Primary Sponsor Portola Ave. to 1-580 Livermore 1-580 at 1st Street Caltrans Bollinger Canyon Road East Branch Rd., Bollinger extension to Camino T assajara Bollinger Canyon Ext. to Windermere Parkway Contra Costa County Camino T assajara Camino Tassajara Widening (East Blackhawk Dr to County Line) Dougherty Road Widen to 8 lanes Widen to 6 lanes north of Dublin Boulevard East Blackhawk Drive to County Line Contra Costa County 1-580 to Dublin Boulevard Dublin Contra Costa county line to 1-580 Dublin Dublin Boulevard Dublin Blvd. Widening Dublin Boulevard Extension Donlon Way to Tassajara Rd. Dublin T assajara to Doolan Rd. Dublin Hopyard Road Hopyard Road widening Valley and Division in Pleasanton Pleasanton San Ramon Road 1-580/Foothill/San Ramon I/C At Foothill interchange Pleasanton San Ramon Valley Boulevard Widen to 4 lanes through Danville Sycamore Valley Rd. to Crow Canyon San Ramon Santa Rita Road Santa Rita Road interchange Santa Rita Road/ Tassajara road at 1- Dublin 580 Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 37 Draft Febntanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Project / Action Name Stanley Boulevard Project / Action Limits Primary Sponsor Widen Murrieta Blvd. to west city limit Stanley Blvd./Isabel grade separation Stoneridge Drive Isabel at Stanley Livermore Extend Stoneridge Drive from current eastern terminus to El Charro Road Santa Rita Road to El Charro Tassajara Road Widen to 8 lanes 1-580 to Dublin Blvd. Dublin Widen to 6 lanes north of Dublin Boulevard From Dublin Blvd. to County line Dublin 5.3 Transit The key transit improvements in the Tri-Valley have been the extension of BART to Dublin-Pleasanton and the institution of ACE commuter service between the Central Valley and Santa Clara County. Local LAVTA WHEELS routes rerouted to serve the BART and ACE station and create transit centers with timed transfers between modes. WHEELS and County Connection routes have also been rerouted and augmented to serve new development areas: North Livermore, East Dublin, and Dougherty Valley. In addition, some new express bus service has been implemented, included subscription bus service between BART and Concord and service between Walnut Creek and Bishop Ranch and the ACE station. Tri Delta transit began new service between East Contra Costa and Livermore. The development pattern in the Tri-Valley is one of overall low density, however, and the new areas proposed for development will generally reinforce the low-density pat- tern. The low-density pattern does not support the extensive use of transit or cost- effective transit operations. If transit is to serve a much greater role than it does today, development densities will need to increase. Some plans for higher residential or com- mercial densities, or both, around BART stations are planned or under development. The East Dublin plan focuses higher densities near the existing BART station. Plans are being developed for a dense commercial and residential development around the planned West Dublin station. Tri-Vlllley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 38 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan includes several transit improvements. These have been developed by a transit subcommittee of the TVTC that has included representatives from BART, CCCTA (County Connection), LAVTA (WHEELS), and Contra Costa County. The plan includes the following major components: Additional BART station in West Dublin, enhanced ACE commuter service, additional park-and-ride lots, additional express bus service in heavily traveled corridors, additional local bus service to new de- velopment areas, reoriented local bus service to serve BART and park-and-ride lots, and decreased headways on existing routes. The Tri-Valley Transit Plan has been developed to correspond to expected funding lev- els. Since the area is expected to almost double in population, the hope is that transit funding will also double, although transit funding may not keep pace with population increases. Nevertheless, the plan includes the provision for significant new services plus greater use of existing routes that have available capacity. Additional riders can be served without additional investment. BART West Dublin Station. The plan includes construction of a new BART station at West Dublin (already under construction). The East Dublin/Pleasanton extension opened in 1998. The planned BART headways are nine minutes. ACE Commuter Service. The ACE commuter service, which began service through the Tri-Valley in 1998, provides peak-hour commuter train service between the Central Val- ley and Santa Clara County. The plan would add four round trips per day. Park-and-Ride Lots. The plan includes the addition of new park-and-ride lots. These would be served by various bus lines and could also serve as staging locations for car- pools. County Connection. The plan calls for the expansion of service from the current six lines serving Tri-Valley (30-minute headways) to eight lines. The lines would serve Danville, San Ramon, Bishop Ranch, and Dougherty Valley; and some would extend down to the East Dublin BART station. WHEELS. Under the plan, WHEELS service would expand from the current 12 lines with 30-60-minute headways to 21 lines, all with 30-minute headways. The route system would be extensively revised to serve the two BART stations, park-and-ride lots, and the newly-developed areas of East Dublin and North Livermore. Some routes would also extend into San Ramon and Danville. Express Bus Service. The plan calls for the provision of new express bus routes operat- ing in the 1-680, 1-580 and Vasco Road corridors. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and A ction Plan Update 39 Draft Febrllanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates lRANSPORTATION SOLUTIOrJS 5.4 Freight Transportation Freight transportation provides an important contribution to the economy. As such, it is both necessary and appropriate that the plan give strategic priority to the movement of freight. To higWight the strategic importance of freight transportation, this plan desig- nates 1-580 as a Critical Freight Route and 1-680 as a Major Freight Route. These designa- tions are consistent with the Alameda County Long-Range Transportation Plan. As a Critical Freight Route, 1-580 should be accorded priority for federal, state and regional intermodal funding. Also, 1-580 should be operated in a manner that ensures that freight can be moved with maximum efficiency. To this end, expenditure priority should be given to those operational improvements necessary to prevent the encroachment of com- mute traffic from congesting Critical Freight Routes during midday hours (defined as from 9:00 am to 3:00 pm). As a Major Freight Route, 1-680 should be given consideration for intermodal funding. 5.5 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) While the TVTC supports TOM measures, it does not want to base the Plan on unrealis- tic TOM goals that are not supported by feasible programs. The Plan is based on a goal of an average 10 percent increase in A VR for all employers increasing the A VR from 1.1 to 1.2. This increase would be realized through the adoption and enforcement of local trip reduction ordinances. The 10 percent increase in A VR will bring some of the inter- sections, otherwise projected to be borderline unacceptable, back into compliance with the MTSOs. 5.6 Land Use and Growth Management Land use assumptions for this Plan Update are based on ABAG Projections 2005, and were subject to extensive review and input by staff from the TVTC local jurisdictions through each planning department. It should be noted, however, that the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan uses a 2030 forecast that is not the same as General Plan "buildout," which may be either higher or lower than the adopted forecast. OVERVIEW OF CONTRA COST A JURISDICTION'S RESPONSIBILI- TIES UNDER THE GMP The Contra Costa GMP requires that local jurisdictions follow a procedure for review of impacts resulting from proposed local General Plan amendments that have the potential to influence the effectiveness of adopted Action Plans The following requirements apply to Contra Costa jurisdictions with regard to compli- ance with the GMP: Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 40 Draft Febnwnj 26,2008 OKS Associates RANSPOHTATION SOLUTIONS · Submission to Regional Committee of proposed revision(s) to Action Plan to mitigate impacts associated with proposed General Plan amendments. General Plan amendments that would reduce the effectiveness of adopted Action Plans may lead to a determination of non-compliance if the Action Plan cannot be re- vised with the approval of the Regional Committee and the CCT A. To respond to this requirement, Contra Costa jurisdictions may include the following types of land-use-policy actions: · Modify allowable densities for newly developing areas or areas where redevel- opment is anticipated. · Change distribution of planned land uses (new or redeveloped) to reduce im- pacts on Regional Routes. · Prohibit urban expansion in specified geographic areas. · Condition development approvals on progress in attaining Multimodal Trans- portation Service Objectives. General Plan Amendments in Contra Costa County The tools and procedures for conducting General Plan updates and analyzing proposed General Plan amendments will be the same as those used in preparing the Growth Man- agement Elements. If the specific project or policy changes are large enough to meet re- quirements established by the region in its adopted Action Plan, the jurisdiction consid- ering the plan amendment must submit the amendment to the Regional Committee for evaluation of its impact on the ability to achieve Action Plan objectives. The Growth Management Program directs the RTPCs to evaluate proposed amendments only in rela- tion to issues affecting Action Plan success and consistency. It will be the responsibility of the jurisdiction considering the amendment to either: 1. Demonstrate that the amendment will not violate Action Plan policies or the abil- ity to meet Action Plan Traffic Service Objectives; or 2. Proposed modification to the Action Plan that will prevent the General Plan amendments from adversely affecting the regional transportation network. If neither of these can be done, approval of the General Plan amendment may lead to a finding of non-compliance with the Growth Management Program. General Plan Consistency with Contra Costa Action Plans The Action Plans for Routes of Regional Significance will be based on adopted General Plan land uses, the existing road network, and planned improvements to the network. Consistency with the Action Plans must be established for any changes to the General Plan that may significantly reduce the ability of the facility to meet the MTSOs. The T ri- Valley T fnnsportlltion Plan and A ction Plan Update 41 Draft Febnumj 26, 2008 OKS Associates f RAN S ,J 0 R TAT ION SOL UTI 0 N S RTPC will be responsible for establishing the type and size of amendment that will re- quire review by the RTPC and the process for implementing this review. Approval of a General Plan amendment found to be inconsistent with the adopted Action Plans may render the jurisdiction ineligible for Local Street and Maintenance Improvement Funds from the CCT A. Consistency with the Action Plans can be achieved by revising the proposed amend- ment, adopting local actions to offset impacts to the Route of Regional Significance, or Councilor Board denial of the amendment. Jurisdictions in the Tri-Valley may implement a proactive Growth and Congestion Man- agement Strategy once a detailed growth management study has been cori.ducted. The study should indicate the development reductions, land use density reductions, or other types of growth management or control that would be required for each applicable Tri- Valley jurisdiction to achieve MTSOs. Any development reduction should be propor- tional to the traffic distribution percentages for each jurisdiction. Also, the impact of this development reduction to traffic impact fees should be analyzed. All jurisdictions will then review this information and know exactly how much reduction in development or growth management or control is needed to meet the MTSOs. JOBS-HOUSING BALANCE One of the most important strategies for linking land use and transportation is jobs- housing balance. In theory, the more workers can either find affordable, attractive hous- ing close to their jobs, or a job that matches their skills and income needs near their place of residence, the more they can shorten the length and duration of their journey to work. Studies have, in fact, shown that a greater jobs-housing balance can shorten work trips, reduce the overall number of work trips and encourage more walking trips. In addition, since commute patterns in "imbalanced" areas are now highly directional, adding new jobs could encourage commuting in the direction where capacity remains. This shift would spread traffic demand more and make more efficient use of our in- vestment in the system. Jobs-housing balance in one area, however, doesn't mean that no one will leave to work in another. In a multi-centered, intensively developed and continually changing urban region like the Bay Area, people usually need to travel beyond their immediate neighborhood not only for work, but also for shopping, childcare, recreation, and other needs. And the large number of dual-career households requires difficult balancing be- tween the different commute needs of the two earners. In addition, even if one area achieves jobs-housing balance, imbalances in other areas will draw workers from bal- anced areas to where there is a deficit of workers to fill the jobs. Tri- Valley Transportation Plallllnd Action Plml Update 42 Draft Febnwnj 26,2008 OKS Associates fRANSPORTAflON SOLUTIONS For example, even though the Tri-Valley has a pretty good balance between jobs and employed residents, around 45 percent of those employed residents commute to jobs outside that sub-area. As long as the Silicon Valley continues adding new jobs but few new houses, those businesses will need to bring in workers from adjoining areas like the Tri-Valley and even further afield. Employers in the Tri- Valley will likewise need to find their workers in places like Central and East Contra Costa and the Central Valley. Urban location theory suggests that greater jobs-housing balance should occur as part of market interactions. While this balancing appears to have taken place, at least to some extent and in some areas, it has not occurred in the Bay Area. If local and regional poli- cies can make a greater proximity between jobs and housing attractive and affordable to the workers in those jobs, the jobs-housing balance can help support greater efficiency on the transportation system. 5.7 Additional Action Plan Actions The Tri-Valley Transportation Plan includes programmed projects to address future transportation needs throughout the Tri-Valley and specific projects along each Route of Regional Significance. These projects were identified in previous sections of this chapter. The roadway projects specific to the Routes of Regional Significance were identified in Tables 8 and 9. The analysis of the future travel demand with the programmed im- provements indicates that the Tri-Valley will not be able to meet all of the goals of the Plan as reflected in the MTSOs. Additional programs to reduce the amount of vehicular travel or projects to provide additional roadway capacity will be required. To address these potential deficiencies, additional actions have been identified. These include re- gional actions designed to improve travel conditions throughout the Tri-Valley as well as additional actions for Routes of Regional Significance. REGIONAL ACTIONS Listed below are regional actions that are intended to reduce congestion and improve efficiency on the regional transportation system. These actions are broader in nature than the route-specific actions identified in the following subsection. Implementation of regional actions requires a coordination effort among local jurisdictions and regional agencies. The TVTC jurisdictions, while not able to implement all of these actions di- rectly, agree to use every opportunity to work cooperatively with responsible agencies, including Caltrans, BART and MTC, toward their successful implementation. 1. Increase A VR for peak hour trips from 1.1 to 1.2 through increased number or frequency of express buses, new HOV lanes, other transit improvements and lo- cal TOM programs. 2. Improve the operational efficiency of freeways and arterial streets through effec- tive corridor management strategies. These strategies could include traffic opera- Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 43 Draft Febrllanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates lRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS tions systems and ramp metering, provided studies show that metering would effectively reduce overall delay within the corridor and not adversely affect op- erations of adjacent intersections. Provide HOV bypass lanes wherever space permits. 3. Support growth that achieves an overall jobs-housing balance within the Tri- Valley. 4. Support new funding sources to support commute alternatives and alternative- fueled vehicles for transit operators to fund needed transportation projects. The extension of county sales tax measures is one potential source of such funding. The State legislature has also passed enabling legislation that would allow MTC to propose a regional gasoline tax to the people of the Bay Area that would focus on providing increased funding for commute alternatives and other transporta- tion projects. 5. Support active promotion of regional ride sharing services and commute incen- tives. 6. Support development of a seamless HOV network in the Tri-Valley to encourage the use of carpools and bus transit, and explore the possibility of connecting the HOV network to adjoining areas. 7. Encourage increases in transit service to meet the needs of the Tri-Valley, par- ticularly the needs of the transit dependent 8. Investigate the use of high-capacity transit wherever it might be appropriate 9. Work to find sources of stable funding to support ongoing transit operations and to support new or enhanced express bus service. 10. Increase coordination of bus services between transit operators (both inter- and intra-county). 11. Support the preparation by Caltrans of an incident management plan for the State highways in the Tri-Valley. The TVTC recognizes that incidents can have a profound effect on traffic conditions both on the freeways and on the arterials. Specific recommendations for expansion of transit services include the following: 1. Regional Express Bus Program 2. Expand BART Bus Feeder Service Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 44 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSf'ORTATION SOLUTIONS 3. Study BART Extension to Livermore 4. Explore Application of Bus Rapid Transit Project 5. Systemwide Bus Stop Improvements 6. Expansion of Para transit Services 7. Support Transit Service in Vasco Road Corridor ADDITIONAL ACTIONS FOR ROUTES OF REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE This section describes additional actions for specific Routes of Regional Significance within the Tri-Valley designed to address potential deficiencies in MTSO values for 2030. These actions are above and beyond the actions identified in Tables 8 and 9 that are already programmed. Once the Plan is adopted, each jurisdiction will be responsible for making a good faith effort to implement the agreed-upon actions. In Contra Costa County, a jurisdiction's compliance with the 1988 Measure C Growth Management Pro- gram will be judged based partly upon its efforts to implement these agreed-upon ac- tions. The actions, programs and measures identified in the Action Plan are intended to miti- gate congestion and achieve the MTSOs assuming that future traffic will be constrained by the limited capacities of highway facilities serving the Tri-Valley Gateways (see Sec- tion 5.2, "Gateway Constraints"). An individual jurisdiction may also elect to implement more stringent actions, measures or programs, in addition to those identified in this plan, on facilities within its jurisdictions. Interregional Routes 1-580 . 1-580: Construct High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lanes 1-580: Construct HOV Lanes, Vasco to San Joaquin 1-580 Eastbound / Westbound HOV Lane 1-580 WB High Occupancy Toll (HOT) Lane . . . 1-680 . I-680/Sycamore Valley Rd HOV Ramps Northbound 1-680 HOV Lane Extension: Through the SR 24 junction, this ele- ment includes a new HOV flyover structure. Evaluate ramp-metering on 1-680 as a method for maintaining an acceptable level for the delay index on both the freeway as well as the local roadway network . . Tri- Valley Transportation Plllnllnd Action Plan Update 45 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSfOORTATION SOLUTIONS . 1-680 Express Bus System Expansion Improve geometrics of intersection of Crow Canyon Road/I-680 southbound off- ramp . SR-84 . Isabel A venue extension SR 84 Expressway SR 84 Expressway Widening Isabel Ave Widening Study extension of Isabel Avenue North of 1-580 . . . . Vasco Road . I-580jVasco I/C Improve to ultimate configuration Intra-Regional Routes Danville Boulevard . Stone Valley Rd. / Danville Blvd. Intersection Improvements Tri- Valley Transportatioll Plan and Action Plall Update 46 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates RANSPORTATION SOLUTIOiJS 6 FINANCIAL PLAN 6.1 Overview of the Financial Plan The projects and programs of the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan receive funding from a variety of sources. Many of the projects and programs designed to ad- dress needs within an individual community are funded by the general revenues of the jurisdiction (city or county) in which the project is being implemented or through devel- opment impact fees specific to the jurisdiction. Larger projects of a more regional nature generally receive funding from a variety of funding sources designed to address subarea or regional issues. These include revenue from the county sales tax measures for Ala- meda County (Measure B) and Contra Costa County (Measures C and n. Measure B was passed in 2000 and extended the half-cent sales tax for transportation in Alameda County through the year 2022. Measure B provides roughly $3 billion over the 20-year period. Some of the key Tri-Valley projects funded by Measure B are the follow- mg: . 1-580 Auxiliary Lanes 1-580 BART to Livermore Studies 1-680 SMART Lanes (HOV /HOT) SR 84 Expressway Vasco Road Safety Improvements Altamont Commuter Express Rail Capital Improvements Bicycle and Pedestrian Trail Improvements . . . . . . Measure C in Contra Costa County was passed in 1988 and provides a half-cent sales tax for transportation through the year 2008. Measure J was passed in 2004 and extends the half-cent sales tax through 2034. Measure C is currently providing roughly $70 million to $80 million per year and Measure J will provide roughly $ 2 billion over the 25-year pe- riod. Some of the key Tri-Valley projects that will be funded by Measures C and J are the following: · 1-680 HOV Lane Gap Closure and Transit Corridor Improvements · BART Parking, Access and Other Improvements · Local Street Maintenance and Improvements · Major Street: · Traffic Flow, Safety and Capacity Improvements · Transportation for Livable Communities Grants · Pedestrian, Bicycle and Trail Facilities · Bus Services · Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities · Commute Alternatives Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 47 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSi'ORTATION SOLUTIONS . Congestion Management, Transportation Planning Facilities and Services Safe Transportation for Children . Additional regional funds are provided by the following federal, state and regional sources: · Federal Surface Transportation Funds - SAFETE-LU · State Transportation Development Act (TDA)/State Transit Assistance (STA) Revenues · State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Funds · State Corridor Management Improvement Account (Prop 1B) · State Environmental Enhancement and Mitigation · STDA, Article 3 - Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds · Bridge Toll Revenues · Regional Measure 2 Bridge Toll Revenues for Specific Projects and Programs · AB 1107 half-cent sales tax revenues for transit (BART and AC Transit) · Transportation Fund for Clean Air - Vehicle Registration Fees for Clean Air Pro- grams Because of the dramatic growth that is expected in the Tri-Valley and the surrounding areas, the funding from the sources identified above will not be sufficient to address all of the travel needs in a way that allows the area to meet all of its MTSOs in 2030. Since the first plan was adopted in 1995, the TVTC has looked to an additional Tri-Valley funding from new development that can be linked directly to new development. Two elements of the financing plan for the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan are designed to address this additional need for funds: the sub regional transportation impact fee, and the cost-sharing formulae for road improvements that benefit multiple jurisdictions. 6.2 Subregional Transportation Impact Fee In 1998, the member jurisdictions of the Tri-Valley Transportation Council entered into a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JEPA) that established the Tri-Valley Transporta- tion Development Fee, or TVTDF. The TVTDF comprises a set of uniform fees on new development within the Tri-Valley area. The use of the fee is guided by the TVTDF Stra- tegic Expenditure Plan, which outlines the priorities for the Tri-Valley area as agreed to by the seven TVTC member agencies. The TVTDF Strategic Expenditure Plan lists pro- ject costs for each of the potential projects to be funded; estimates expected revenues from the TVTDF and other possible revenue sources for the projects; sets a prioritization plan and a time line for project delivery; and identifies the TVTDF jurisdiction responsi- ble for overseeing implementation of the project. The 26 projects that the fee can fund are shown below. They are divided into two groups. Exhibit A projects are the original 15 projects funded through the fee program Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Actioll Plall Update 48 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates fRANSPORfAflON SOLUrlONS adopted in 1995. The 11 Exhibit B projects have recently been added in the latest update of the fee nexus study. Three of the original projects have already been completed. They are indicated below. EXHIBIT A PROJECTS 1. 1-580/ 1-680 Interchange (COMPLETE) 2. 1-680 / Alcosta Blvd 1/ C (COMPLETE) 3. Vasco Road Safety Phase I 4. Vasco Road Safety Phase II 5. Crow Canyon Road Safety Phase I 6. Crow Canyon Road Safety Phase II 7. 1-680 HOV Lanes SR 84 to Sunol Grade (COMPLETE) 8. 1-580 Eastbound HOV Lane 9. 1-580 Westbound HOV Lane 10. SR 84 Expressway 11. SR 84 I/C 12. Express Bus Service 13. 1-680 Aux Lanes Segment 2 14. West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station 15. I-580/Foothill/San Ramon I/C EXHIBIT B PROJECTS 1. 1-580/1-680 WB to SB 2. 5th EB 1-580 through lane, Santa Rita Rd to Vasco Rd 3. 1-580 First Street I/C 4. 1-580 Vasco Rd I/C 5. 1-580 Greenville I/C 6. Jack London Blvd Extension to EI Charro Rd 7. EI Charro Rd Extension 8. Camino Tassajara Widening (East Blackhawk Dr to County Line) 9. Stone Valley Rd. / Danville Blvd. Intersection Improvements 10. 1-680 HOV Lanes Livorna Road to North Main 11. 1-680 HOV Facilities/Express Bus 6.3 Shared Facilities Implementation of much of the planned arterial system will be the direct responsibility of new development. Many of the arterials, however, are shared among jurisdictions. For each of these improvements, a negotiated agreement needs to be reached about cost sharing between jurisdictions. The cost-sharing approach could be based on which ju- risdiction's traffic is expected to use the facility, or it could be based simply on the boundaries within which the facility lies, or a combination. These agreements should be Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 49 Draft Febrllanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TfiANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS negotiated in advance so that when development takes place, the responsibility for road improvements is clear. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 50 Draft Febnwnj 26,2008 OKS Associates iRANSPORTATION SOl.UTIONS 7 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION, MONITORING, AND REVIEW This chapter describes how the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan will be implemented. Specific topics include plan adoption by member jurisdictions, the procedure for moni- toring transportation service objectives, and procedures for handling development ap- plications. 7.1 Plan Adoption and Amendment As specified in the Joint Powers Agreement (JP A) that created the TVTC, adoption of the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan shall require the unanimous vote of all members of the TVTC. Following plan adoption, all TVTC member jurisdictions agree to consider the Plan when adopting or amending circulation elements of their general plans and specific plans, zoning ordinances, or capital improvement programs. While compliance with the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan (TVTP) is essentially volun- tary among the Alameda County jurisdictions, at least until aspects of the TVTP become part of the Alameda County Congestion Management Program, the Contra Costa juris- dictions have a mandate for compliance. Because the TVTP constitutes the Action Plan for the Contra Costa Tri-Valley jurisdictions, the Contra Costa jurisdictions in the Tri- Valley must implement the planned actions to maintain compliance with Measure C and J or risk losing their return-to-source funds. Compliance is tied to local implementation of action policies as described in Chapter 5, "Action Plan." One locality, however, cannot be judged ineligible for local street maintenance and improvement funds because of the unwillingness of another locality to participate in the process. The first TVTP was adopted in January 1995 and the TVTC updated it in 2000 in con- junction with the preparation of the 2000 Contra Costa Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The 2008 TVTP is the second update to the original plan. In the fu- ture, the TVTC is expected to comprehensively update the TVTP every four to eight years. More focused amendments to the TVTC can be triggered by: 1. Responses to identified exceedances of adopted MTSOs; 2. A jurisdiction's proposal to adopt a major general plan amendment that was not considered in the existing plan and that propose new or modified actions in the TVTP; andj or 3. A change in the major assumptions underlying the Plan, such as a change in the assumptions for Gateway Constraints. Tri-Valley Transportation Plllnllnd Action Plan Update 51 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORIAflON SOI.UTIONS This plan is based upon the assumption that major gateways into Tri-Valley will not be expanded beyond the capacities assumed for the gateways as set forth in Chapter 5. Any change in these assumptions, such as the addition of HOV lanes on 1-580 over the Alta- mont Pass, would require that this plan be amended to incorporate revised assumptions for the Tri-Valley gateway constraints. Increased capacity at the gateways could signifi- cantly increase projected congestion on downstream freeway sections and arterial streets. As specified in the Joint Powers Agreement governing the TVTC, amendments to the plan will require a unanimous vote of all members of the TVTC. 7.2 Monitoring Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives The Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSOs) are the heart of the TVTP. They represent the both the TVTC's objectives for how the Regional Routes function and its yardstick for measuring progress for achieving its goals. Chapter 5, Action Plan, out- lines the MTSOs and the Regional Routes to which they apply. Currently, the MTSOs are largely being met. With forecast growth, however, many of the MTSOs are expected to be exceeded by 2030, even with planned improvements and the other actions outlined in the TVTP. As part of the periodic comprehensive review and update of the TVTP, the TVTC will monitor the current status of the MTSOs and forecast their status in the future. This monitoring will rely on data collected from the CCT A and the Alameda CMA. Freeway Levels of Service. This MTSO is expressed in terms of hours of congestion. Hours of congestion can be measured with traffic counts or speed runs and should ap- ply to mixed-flow lanes only. The plan uses a capacity of 2,200 vehicles per lane per hour (1,100 vehicles capacity for auxiliary lanes). Traffic counts can also be used to show duration of congestion. Freeway monitoring should be done by Caltrans or the CMA. Delay Index. The Delay Index compares the time required to travel between two points during the peak hour to the time required during non-congested, off-peak hours. This measure is defined as the observed travel time divided by the free-flow travel time: Delay Index (DI) = (Observed Travel Time) -;- (Free-Flow Travel Time) The minimum value for the Delay Index - which indicates minimum delay - is 1.0. A 01 of 1.0 indicates that traffic is moving at free-flow speed, as measured by floating car runs, unconstrained by congestion. As congestion increases and average speed de- creases, the 01 increases as well. For example, a 01 of 2.0 indicates that the trip takes twice as long during peak hours as during the off-peak, due to congestion and slow speed. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plntz Update 52 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS Intersection Levels of Service. Intersection levels of service should be calculated using the CCT ALOS method for AM and PM peak hours based on turning-movement counts. Intersection monitoring should be conducted by the jurisdiction in which the intersec- tion lies. The intent of the TVTP is to maintain the intersection MTSO at all signalized intersections. However, to avoid extensive data collection, each jurisdiction should es- tablish a list of critical intersection for monitoring. TVTC should initiate a discussion of utilizing intersection level-of-service calculations based on the Highway Capacity Man- ual as a supplement or alternative to the CCT ALOS method. Mode Split. Mode split is virtually impossible to measure in the field, except through extensive home interview and work place surveys. These data are available every dec- ade from the us. Census and periodically from MTC. In between times, transit rider- ship should be monitored as a surrogate for mode split. The mode split goal of the TVTP can only be met if transit ridership increases over the reporting period. The transit op- erators routinely collect and report annual ridership. Average Vehicle Ridership. This MTSO relates directly to commute trips. The Tri- Valley Transportation Plan includes a regional action to increase A VR from 1.1 to 1.2. Several Tri-Valley jurisdictions maintain voluntary employer trip reduction programs to increase A VR. 7.3 Development Applications Review and General Plan Amend- ments As noted above, the JPA that established the Tri-Valley Transportation Council requires each member jurisdiction to consider the TVTP when it adopts or amends circulation elements of their general plans and specific plans, zoning ordinances, or capital im- provement programs. In addition, the JP A requires member jurisdictions to bring pro- posed new transportation projects of "regional or subregional significance" to the TVTC for review and comment. The member jurisdictions, as part of the adoption of the Tri-Valley Transportation Plan, have agreed to analyze the impacts of new development and general plan amendments and to share the results of these analyses with other Tri-Valley jurisdictions. These analyses shall assume gateway constraints described in this plan as described in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's Technical Procedures. The TVTP recognizes that the Alameda and Contra Costa members of the TVTC must respond to different countywide requirements for analyzing the effects of land use or land use plan changes: the Alameda jurisdictions must fulfill the requirements of the Alameda Congestion Management Program while the Contra Costa jurisdictions must fulfill the requirements of both the Measure C Growth Management Program (which will be superseded by the Measure J GMP in 2009) and the Contra Costa CMP. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 53 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates fRANSPOflTATION SOLUTIONS Development Review. Member jurisdictions must analyze the impacts of any develop- ment project that generates more than 100 peak hour vehicle trips and must circulate that analysis to all the jurisdictions that make up the TVTC. This analysis may be circu- lated separately or as part of CEQA documents prepared by the lead agency. Lead agen- cies may elect to use the MTSOs as thresholds of significance in their CEQA documents. Consistent with the JP A, the member jurisdiction should forward any regional and subregional transportation projects proposed as mitigation measures for the project for TVTC review and comment. Contra Costa jurisdictions must conduct this analysis consistent with the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's Implementation Guide and Technical Procedures. Alameda ju- risdictions must assess the effects of the development on the Metropolitan Transporta- tion System consistent with the Alameda CMP. General Plan Amendments. Member jurisdictions must analyze the impacts of any amendment to their General Plans that generates more than 500 peak hour vehicle trips and must circulate that analysis to all the jurisdictions that make up the TVTC. This analysis may be circulated separately or as part of CEQA documents prepared by the lead agency. A jurisdiction considering a general plan amendment should evaluate its impact on the TVTP and demonstrate that the proposed amendment would not signifi- cantly reduce the ability to achieve the MTSOs. If further transportation improvements are necessary beyond what are in the TVTP, the jurisdiction should specify how they would be funded. For the Contra Costa jurisdictions, approval of a General Plan Amendment found to be inconsistent with the adopted Action Plans may result in a finding that the jurisdiction is out of compliance with the Measure C or J GMP and thus ineligible for Local Street Maintenance and Improvements and CC-TLC funds from the CCTA. Consistency with the Action Plans can be achieved by revising the proposed amend- ment, adopting local actions to offset impacts to the Route of Regional Significance, or Councilor Board denial of the amendment. If there are MTSO exceedances, or projected MTSO exceedances, in a Tri-Valley jurisdic- tion, then that jurisdiction can either (a) implement transportation improvements (e.g., road widening) to correct the MTSO deficiency on that affected network segment, or (b) implement other measures intended to result in measurable improvements to MTSOs on the Routes of Regional Significance network and contribute to significant improvements in air quality. Failing this, the jurisdiction can refer the problem to the TVTC for joint resolution. The tools and procedures for conducting General Plan amendments and analyzing pro- posed General Plan amendments shall be in accordance with the Measure C/J Technical Procedures and Implementation Documents. If the specific project or policy changes gener- Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and A ction Plan Update 54 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS ate more than 500 peak hour vehicle trips, the jurisdiction considering the Plan amend- ment must submit the amendment to the Regional Committee for evaluation of its im- pact on the ability to achieve Action Plan objectives. TVTC would then evaluate pro- posed amendments only in relation to issues affecting Action Plan success and consis- tency. It will be the responsibility of the jurisdiction considering the amendment to ei- ther: 1. Demonstrate that the amendment will not violate Action Plan policies or the abil- ity to meet Action Plan Traffic Service Objectives; or 2. Propose modification to the Action Plan that will prevent the General Plan amendment from adversely affecting the regional transportation network. If neith~r of these can be done, approval of the General Plan amendment by a Contra Costa jurisdiction may lead to a finding of non-compliance with the Growth Manage- ment Program. In Contra Costa Counh}, if a MTSO is not met following implementation of the Action Plan, the Plan would need to be reevaluated through the forum of TVTC and SWAT. Amendments to the Plan could include a relaxation of MTSOs, a strengthening of ac- tions, or a combination of these approaches. In Alameda County, the jurisdiction with the MTSO violation can elect to modify growth rates, improve the facility, or seek a lower MTSO standard through the amendment process set forth in this chapter. 7.4 Conflict Resolution Because of the importance of support for the Plan by all members of the TVTC, the Council should act on a consensus basis. Some cases may arise, however, in which con- sensus cannot be reached. In cases where conflict exists between jurisdiction within one county, resolution should be negotiated through the forum of the Congestion Manage- ment Agency for the respective county. In cases where conflict exists between jurisdic- tions in different counties, resolution should be negotiated through the TVTC with the provisions of the Joint Powers Agreement applying. These provisions state the follow- mg: 1. Unanimous vote of all members required for plan adoption and amendment. 2. Unanimous vote of all members required for adoption of annual work program and budget. 3. Five votes required for grant applications, expenditure of funds, execution of contracts, and adoption of rules of procedure. 4. Majority vote of all members present required for action on any other matter. Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 55 Draft Februanj 26, 2008 OKS Associates TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS 7.5 Future Role of TVTC It is anticipated that implementation of the Action Plan will rest primarily with the indi- vidual jurisdictions. However, the plan has identified some continuing functions for the TVTC, as follows: . Updates and amendments to the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF) Coordinated implementation of actions requiring inter-jurisdictional coopera- tion, including supporting the funding and development of the projects and pro- grams listed in the TVTDF. . Tri- Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan Update 56 Draft Febnwnj 26, 2008 Good evening Mayor and members of the Council With the Contra Costa Transportation Authority taking the lead, and in cooperation with the Tri-Valley Transportation Council elected officials, Tri-Valley staff and a transportation consultant, a Draft Tri-Valley Transportation Plan and Action Plan 2008 Update has been prepared. I will be presenting to you this evening the key elements of this draft plan update. Staff recommends that Council hear the presentation and provide comments that will be forwarded to the Tri- Valley Transportation Council (TVTC) later this month. Because the TVTC is comprised of jurisdictions within Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, it is important to clarify participation requirements of jurisdictions within each County. All member jurisdictions, including the City of Dublin, are required to consider the Plan when adopting or amending general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances or capital improvement programs. All member jurisdictions are required to bring forward to the TVTC for review and comment "regionally or subregionally significant" transportation projects. In addition, Contra Costa County jurisdictions ONL Yare required to implement the actions to maintain compliance with Contra Costa County's Measures J or risk losing their retum-to-source funds. Although the City of Dublin is not required to carry out the actions, the City does have an interest in the Plan because it establishes priorities through statements of visions and goals; it sets forth policies, such as the gateway constraints policy; and it creates a plan by which the City and its neighbors will follow and shape the Tri- Valley over the next 20 years. Slide change - go over schedule 0f~ JJ, ;$-. ~1_ /_~:? 7'><--. +0 Slide change - Background In 1988, Contra Costa County voters approved Measure C, a one-half percent sales tax that generated $1 billion in transportation funding over 20 years. The measure also included a Growth Management Program (GMP) that encouraged local jurisdictions to participate in multi-jurisdictional planning. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) was created to implement the GMP. In 2004, Measure J was passed, which extended the sales tax program and the GMP for an additional 25 years. CCT A allocates 18 percent of the sales tax revenue to local jurisdictions that comply with the GMP requirements, which include participation in multi-jurisdictional planning and development of an Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance. The TVTC, composed of elected officials from Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Pleasanton, Livermore, Contra Costa County and Alameda County, is one of the multi-jurisdictional planning areas. In addition to developing and implementing an Action Plan. Slide change - Background (cont.) The Action Plan must (1) identify Routes of Regional Significance; (2) set Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives (MTSO's); and (3) establish actions for meeting the MTSO's. In 1995, the TVTC developed and adopted the first Transportation Plan and Action Plan, which served as a transportation planning guide through 2010 and as an Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance for Contra Costa County jurisdictions as mandated by Measure C. The Action Plan underwent a focused update in 2000. With the availability of new demographic, land use and travel forecast data, the passing of Measure J in Contra Costa County, the approval of the state-wide Proposition IB, and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's update of the Regional Transportation Plan, there is a need to update the Transportation Plan and Action Plan. Slide change - Plan Elements . Statements of Vision, Goals and Policies . Routes of Regional Significance . Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives . Implementation Actions . Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program . Development Review Procedures Slide change - Plan Elements (Development review and RRS faded) The Development review procedures have remain unchanged and establish when development projects should be analyzed and the transportation mitigation measures brought forward to the TVTC for review. The purpose is to insure that projects will not move forward that might affect the Tri- Valley's ability to meet the MTSO's without the TVTC's review. The Routes of Regional Significance also remain unchanged with this plan, but I will provide an overview of the routes before discussing the remaining Plan elements. Slide change - RRS Routes of regional significance are defined as routes that: (1) carry significant through traffic; (2) connect two or more jurisdictions; (3) serve major transportation hubs; or (4) cross county lines. Slide change - RRS Map Discuss red and green Existing routes - San Ramon Road, Dublin Blvd, Dougherty Road, Tassajara Road Future routes - Hacienda Drive, Fallon Road and Dublin extension as future routes All changes require unanimous agreement. It was decided by the TVTC that in the interest of meeting the overall schedule for completion of the 2008 Plan Update and the likelihood of not coming to consensus on the proposed changes, the prior list of Routes of Regional Significance would be retained. I will now discuss the elements that have changed in the current draft plan. Slide change - Statement of Vision, Goals and Policies - original The prior statements have been completely rewritten. Slide change - Statement of Vision, Goals and Policies - guiding factors Define gateway constraints concept If asked: The plan is based on the following set of assumptions regarding gateway capacity: . /-680 North - Six lanes plus HOV lanes . /-680 South - Six lanes plus HOV lanes . /-580 West - Eight lanes . /-580 East (Altamont Pass) - Eight lanes plus HOV lanes . Crow Canyon Road (to Castro Valley) - Two lanes with safety improvements . Vasco Road - Two lanes with safety improvements Slide change - Statement of Vision, Goals and Policies - proposed (13 total) Slide change - Statement of Vision, Goals and Policies - proposed Slide change - Statement of Vision, Goals and Policies - proposed Slide change - Statement of Vision, Goals and Policies - proposed Slide change - Multimodal Transportation Service Objectives . Peak Hour Travel Speed - This measure applies to 1-580 and 1-680 and sets a minimum average speed for the AM and PM peak hours of 30 mph. . Delay Index (DI) - This measure is defined as the ratio between the time required to travel between two points during the peak hour and the time required to travel between the same two points during an off- peak, non-congested hour. The objective for 1-580 and 1-680 is 2.0 or less. In other words, it would take no more than twice as long during the peak hour to travel on these routes than during an off-peak hour. The objective for SR-84 is 3.0 or less. . Duration of Congestion - This measure is expressed in terms of the amount of time of congestion, as determined by travel speeds or traffic counts. The objective for the southern gateway of 1-680 (south of SR-84) is five hours or less. . Intersection Levels of Service - As determined using the Contra Costa Transportation Authority Level of Service (CCTALOS) method, level of service should be calculated for the AM and PM peak hours. The objective is to maintain Level of Service (LOS) D at signalized intersections on Routes of Regional Significance. . Mode Split - This is typically measured through extensive home interview and work place surveys. The U.S. Census collects this data every ten years. Transit ridership may be monitored as an alternate means for determining whether more transit trips are occurring. The goal is to have an increasing amount of transit ridership. . Average Vehicle Ridership - This measure is the ratio of total person commute trips to vehicles used for commuting. The plan calls for a regional increase from 1.1 to 1.2. Slide change - Implementation Actions The major actions identified in the 2008 Plan Update include: 1-680 . Complete auxiliary lanes . Extend HOV system . HOV direct access ramps . Test High Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes . Expand 1-680 Express Bus System 1-580 . 5th eastbound through lane . Westbound auxiliary lane . High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes . Test HOT lanes SR-84 . Widening . Grade separation/expressway operation . Interchange reconstruction Transit . West Dublin BART station . Expand ACE service . Expand bus express service . Expand local bus and paratransit servIces . Add Park & Ride lots Arterial Routes . Extend 3 routes, including Dublin Boulevard and Stoneridge Drive . Widen 8 routes, including Dougherty Road, Dublin Boulevard and Tassajara Road . Rebuild 3 interchanges Programmatic . Support growth that leads to jobs-housing balance . Support transit, HOV and demand management programs to reduce vehicle trips . Support development of a seamless HOV network . Improve operational efficiency of freeways and arterial streets through corridor management . Work to find stable funding for existing and expanded programs Slide change - Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program Transportation improvement projects are funded through local development impact fees and County-wide sales tax revenues, such as those collected through Measure B in Alameda County and Measure J in Contra Costa County. Additional funding is available at the regional, state and federal levels, but these sources are inadequate to address the future needs in the Tri-Valley. As such, the TVTC created a Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) in 1998. Member jurisdictions entered into a J oint Exercise Powers Agreement (JEP A) that established the Tri -Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF). A TVTDF Strategic Expenditure Plan was also created to set project priorities and timelines for project delivery. An Updated Tri-Valley Nexus Study Report was recently approved by TVTC, which identifies the most current list of improvement projects required to mitigate future forecasted growth in the Tri-Valley and the corresponding development fees that would be needed to fully fund the improvement projects. Approval of the study is not an endorsement by TVTC to increase the existing fees. Rather, discussions over the next couple of months will be aimed at determining if and by how much the fees should be adjusted. Slide change - Questions or Comments? Reminder: Because the TVTC is comprised of jurisdictions within Contra Costa and Alameda Counties, it is important to clarify participation requirements of jurisdictions within each County. According to the TVTC Joint Powers Agreement, all Tri-Valley member jurisdictions, including the City of Dublin, are required to consider the Plan when adopting or amending general plans, specific plans, zoning ordinances or capital improvement programs. Furthermore, all member jurisdictions are required to bring forward to the TVTC for review and comment "regionally or subregionally significant" transportation projects. In addition, Contra Costa County jurisdictions ONL Yare required to implement the actions to maintain compliance with Contra Costa County's Measures C and J or risk losing their return-to-source funds.