The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About5.1 ACTA WrttnCommI580/680CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT City Council Meeting Date: July 11, 1994 SUBJECT: Written Communication: Request from Alameda County Transportation Authority (ACTA) Regarding I-580/I-680 Direct Connector Project Report by: Public Works Director Lee Thompson EXHIBITS ATTACHED: 1) 2) 3) Letter from A1 Gallardo, Executive Director, ACTA Draft Response ACTA Staff will attend the meeting to make a brief presentation and answer questions RECOMMENDATION: Authorize Mayor to send letter of response to ACTA as follows: 1) The following alternates now being studied are adequate in scope: Alternate M. _ No project Alternate "B ~ - South to east direct "flyover" ramp connector which precludes access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road from southbound 1-680, and includes three new "hook ramps" from 1-680 to Dublin Alternate 'C" - South to east direct "flyover" ramp connector which includes access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road from southbound 1-680 and includes three new "hook ramps" from 1-680 to downtown Dublin. 2) The City Council intends to accept the final project selection from Alternates "B" or "C", resulting from the environmental studies, with the assumption that there are no additional costs to Dublin if Alternate "C" is chosen over Alternate "B". FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Alternate "C", which includes an offramp to Johnson Drive in Pleasanton, will be up to $14 million more expensive than Alternate "B" and could require more "local matching" money than is now required. DESCRIPTION: The Alameda County Transportation Authority (ACTA) has been studying a direct connector flyover freeway-to-freeway ramp from southbOund 1-680 to eastbound 1-580 for several years. Until recently, the layout of this plan precluded offramp access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road. For this reason, Dublin has been pursuing a downtown Dublin interchange from 1-680 as a mitigation to the loss of the Dougherty Road access. Recently, Pleasanton requested that ACTA study the addition of a "slip ramp" to Johnson Drive to restore the Hopyard access. ACTA has ag. reed to include this new alternate for environmental study purposes as an addition to the existing project alternates with the understanding that there will be additional costs which are presently unfunded. ACTA is now requesting assurance from both Dublin and Pleasanton that if ACTA invests in these studies, both Pleasanton and Dublin would abide by the outcome of the studies. Alternate "A", the "no project" alternate, is unacceptable inasmuch as the voters in Alameda County have voted to increase gasoline taxes to pay for several major transportation projects, including this project. ITEM NO..~ COPIES TO: A1 Gallardo, ACTA Alternate "B" mitigates the loss of 1-680 access to Dougherty Road for Dublin and provides direct 1-680 access to the proposed West Dublin BART Station. Alternate "C" provides downtown Dublin 1-680 access as well as restores the 1-680 southbound offramp access to Dougherty Road. Both alternates "B" and "C" will provide congestion relief to the 1-580/1-680 interchange and will provide enhanced access to Dublin's downtown shopping area. Alternate "C" has the additional benefit of restoring the lost 1-680 offramp access to Dougherty Road. Staff recommends that the City Council receive ACTA Staff's presentation, deliberate, and authorize the Mayor to send a letter of response on behalf of the City Council (Exhibit 2), as outlined under "Recommendation" above. a:(9495}ljulylagstacta Page 2 Alameda County TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY June 23,1994 Richard Ambrose, City Manager City of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, CA 94568 SUBJECT: 1.580/680 Direct Connector Project File MB.3'I 0 1994 ~,,~ry ~ DU~LIN David W. Smith Chairman Mayor, Newark Keith Caison Vice-Chairman Supervisor Elizabeth Baker Mayor, Albany Edward R. Campbell Supervisor Elihu M. Harris Mayor, Oakland Mary V. King Supervisor Don Perata Supervisor Peter W. Snyder Mayor, Dublin Gail Steele Supervisor A.J. Gallardo Executive Director 1401 Lakeside Drive Suite 1201 Oakland, California 94612-4305 Telephone 510 / 893-3347 Facsimile 510 / 893-6489 Dear Mr. Ambrose: This letter concerns environmental studies for the proposed south to east direct connector at the 580/680 Interchange in the Cities of Dublin and Pleasanton. Until recently, the environmental studies included only the following alternatives: · No project A south to east connector that precluded access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road from southbound 1-680. As it was believed that these alternatives were acceptable to all entities affected by the project, the Authority proceeded with design development. To date the Authority has expended approximately $6 million in design development. A May 19, 1994, request from the Pleasanton City Council has resulted in the addition of a new study alternative. This new alternative will preserve access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road from southbound 1-680. The addition of this study alternative has caused the Authority to examine whether it should continue with "at-risk" project design. The Authority's examination considered the following three design options: · Proceed with the previous design (no access to Hopyard/Dougherty from southbound 1-680) · Proceed with the Hopyard/Dougherty access alternative. Cease project development pending certification of the final environmental document. A summary of the options and impacts is enclosed for your ready reference. Authority staff has recommended proceeding with design of the Hopyard/Dougherty access alternative. This approach will increase design costs by $4 million, and construction costs by about $10 million. There are no new funding sources for these additional costs. The impact of this design change on the Measure B program has not yet been assessed. It may be necessary to seek other funding sources including an added local match committment. The Authority is concerned about this added expenditure of a considerable sum of Measure B funds for design without any assurance that the final project selection will be accepted by local government. Therefore, the purpose of this letter is to seek the following assurances from the Dublin City Council: That the alternatives currently being studied in the environmental document are adequate in scope. That the Council intends to accept the final project selection resulting from the environmental studies. Please call if you wish to discuss this matter. The Authority staff is willing to present this subject to the City Council. Executive Director CC: Lee Thompson, City of Dublin Randy Lum, City of Pleasanton Ernie Satow, Caltrans Tom Wintch, Greiner Work Pro.,2rsm Cot,-,,-~'''~ Authority Counsel Authority Staff als/dircnntrpjt.062394 May 16, 1994 P~v~o 1 SUMMARY OF PROJECT OPTIONS OPTION IMPACTS COST IMPACTS SCHEDULE IMPACTS lA. Proceed with the present Consensus Plan lB. Proceed with project development of the "preferred" Hopyard Road Access Alternative to the 60% submittal stage. Design will be prepared concurrently with the Environmental Document (ED) 2. Cease Project Development pending certification of the Final Environmental Document Positives Stays on schedule and minimizes construction cost Negatives COP potentially will not sign Freeway Agreement; ED may be challenged. Positives Design progresses; provides maximum flexibility in project type selection Negatives Design at risk; limited redesign may be necessary Positives Design at risk is minimized _Ne.qa_.tives Loss of momentum; schedule delays; costs due to escalation, reinitiation of design team, metrication, etc. Anticipated design budget to complete is $13.2 million; present contract is $12.2 million Additional design costs if Consensus Project challenged (range of $5 to $6 million) Anticipated design budget to complete is $15.2 million; present contract is $12.2 million Potential ~3 to $4 million design at risk No delay to present schedule; construction begins 1/97 Delay of 3-5 years if ED challenged No delay to present schedule; construction begins 1/97 Potential 12 month delay if go back to Consensus Project at 60% design stage $15 to $25 million cost of delay for both design and construction Potential 3 year minimum delay; construction begins 2~2000 DRA~ June 30, 1994 Mr. A1 Gallardo, Executive Director ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY 1401 Lakeside Drive Suite 1201 Oakland CA 94612-4305 SUBJECT: 1-580/1-680 Direct Connector Project Your Letter of June 23, 1994 Dear Mr. Gallardo: On July 11, 1994, the Dublin City Council reviewed your letter regarding the 1-580/1-680 Direct Connector Project Alternatives and determined to take the following position: The following alternates now being studied are adequate in scope: Alternate "A ~ - Alternate 'B ' - Alternate " C" - No project South to east direct "flyover" ramp connector which precludes access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road from southbound 1-680, and includes three new "hook ramps" from 1-680 to Dublin South to east direct "flyover" ramp connector which includes access to Hopyard/Dougherty Road from southbound 1-680 and includes three new "hook ramps" from 1-680 to downtown Dublin. The City Council intends to accept the final project selection from Alternates "B" or "C", resulting from the environmental studies, with the assumption that there are no additional costs to Dublin if Alternate "C" is chosen over Alternate "B". We hope this clarifies Dublin's position and gives you a greater level of comfort in proceeding with the present course of the study. If you have any questions, please feel free to call my office at 833-6605. Sincerely, PWS/LST/gr Peter W. Snyder Mayor a.'(9495) [july II 1 acta