TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN BOARD OF · PDF file03/06/2017 · Kathrin Sears Dennis Rodoni ... BART Bay Area Rapid Transit: ... TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN TAM FEBRUARY

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING MARCH 23, 2017

7:00 P.M. MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 330 3501 Civic Center Drive, San Rafael, California

Continued on Page 2

Late agenda material can be inspected in TAM’s office between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The TAM Office is located at 900 Fifth Avenue, Suite, 100, San Rafael.

The meeting facilities are accessible to persons with disabilities. Requests for special accommodations (assisted listening

device, sign language interpreters, etc.) should be directed to Denise Merleno, 415-226-0820 or email:[email protected] no later than 5 days before the meeting date.

The Marin County Civic Center is served by several bus lines including Marin Transit Routes 45, 45K, 49, 233, and 259. Route 45 provides service to the Civic Center Hall of Justice Arch until 8:43 PM. In the evening, Golden Gate Transit provides service until 11:24 PM with routes 70 and 80 along Highway 101 from the San Pedro Road bus pads, which are about a half mile away. To access the San Pedro bus pad NB, walk south down San Pedro Rd and take the footpath to the NB 101 onramp where the bus stop is located. To access the SB pad, walk down San Pedro Rd and under the freeway, turn right on Merrydale and then take the footpath near the SB onramp to the bus pad. For arrival and departure times, call 511 or visit www.marintransit.org, or www.goldengate.com

900 Fifth Avenue Suite 100 San Rafael California 94901 Phone: 415/226-0815 Fax: 415/226-0816 www.tam.ca.gov Belvedere James Campbell Corte Madera Diane Furst Fairfax John Reed Larkspur Dan Hillmer Mill Valley Stephanie Moulton-Peters Novato Eric Lucan Ross P. Beach Kuhl San Anselmo Tom McInerney San Rafael Gary Phillips Sausalito Ray Withy Tiburon Alice Fredericks County of Marin Damon Connolly Katie Rice Kathrin Sears Dennis Rodoni Judy Arnold

AGENDA

1. Chair’s Report (Discussion)

2. Commissioner Matters Not on the Agenda (Discussion)

3. Executive Director’s Report (Discussion)

a. Transportation Acronyms - Attachment

b. Look Ahead Report - Attachment

c. Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Third Lane and Multi-Use Path Report

4. Commissioner Reports (Discussion)

a. MTC Report - Commissioner Connolly

b. Marin Transit Report – Commissioner Sears

c. SMART – Vice-Chair Arnold

5. Open time for public expression, up to three minutes per speaker, on items not on the Board of Commissioners’ Agenda. (While members of the public are welcome to address the Board, under the Brown Act, Board members may not deliberate or take action on items not on the agenda, and generally may only listen.)

1

TAM Board Agenda March 23, 2017 Page 2

6. CONSENT CALENDAR (Action) – Attachment

a. Approve Draft TAM Board Meeting Minutes of February 23, 2017

b. Award of a $5,000 Grant to the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce In Support of Its 2016-2017 Leadership Class Emergency Bicycle Repair Fixit Station Project

c. Review and Approval of FY2017-18 Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee Revenue Estimates and Budget Development Schedule

d. Accept Construction Contract for the Brookdale Avenue Visual Mitigation Project

e. Exercise First Second-Year Option on Contract with Transmetro to Manage TAM’s Emergency Ride Home Program

7. Adopt Positions on State Legislative Bills (Action) - Attachment

8. Regional Measure 3 – Project Candidate List (Action) - Attachment

9. Consider the Origin & Destination Data Collection Draft Report (Discussion) – Attachment

10. Approve Letter to MTC Requesting Study Of Hwy 101 / SR 37 Traffic Impacts (Action) - Attachment

11. Caltrans Report (Discussion)

2

Acronym Full TermABAG Association of Bay Area Governments

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act

ATP Active Transportation Program

BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District

BATA Bay Area Toll Authority

BART Bay Area Rapid Transit

BCDC Bay Conservation and Development Commission

BPAC Bicycle / Pedestrian Advisory Committee

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

BTA Bicycle Transportation Account

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

CIP Capital Investment Program

CMA Congestion Management Agency

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

CMFC Central Marin Ferry Connection

CMP Congestion Management Program

COC Citizens Oversight Committee

CO-OP Cooperative Agreement

CON Construction

CTC California Transportation Commission

DPW Department of Public Works

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EV Electric Vehicle

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

FY Fiscal Year

GGT Golden Gate Transit

GGBHTD Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District

HOT Lane High Occupancy Toll Lane

HOV Lane High Occupancy Vehicle Lane

ITIP Interregional Transportation Improvement Program

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems

JARC Job Access and Reverse Commute

LATIP Local Area Transportation Improvement Program

LOS Level of Service

MCBC Marin County Bicycle Coalition

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MPWA Marin Public Works Association

MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission

Transportation AcronymsItem 3a

3

Acronym Full Term

Transportation Acronyms

MTS Metropolitan Transportation System

Neg Dec Negative Declaration

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NOP Notice of Preparation

NTPP Non-motorized Transportation Pilot Program

OBAG One Bay Area Grant

PAED Project Approval and Environmental Document

PCA Priority Conservation Area

PCI Pavement Condition Index

PDA Priority Development Area

PRA Public Records Act

PS&E Plans, Specifications and Engineers Estimate

PSR Project Study Report

RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation

RM2 Regional Measure 2 (Bridge Toll)

RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program

RTP Regional Transportation Plan

SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy

SLPP State-Local Partnership Program

SMART Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit

SR State Route

SR2S/SRTS Safe Routes to Schools

STA State Transit Assistance

STIP State Transportation Improvement Program

STP Federal Surface Transportation Program

TCM Transportation Control Measures

TCRP Transportation Congestion Relief Program

TDA Transportation Development Act

TDM Transportation Demand Management

TFCA Transportation Fund for Clean Air

TIP Federal Transportation Improvement Program

TLC Transportation for Livable Communities

TMP Traffic Management Plan

TMS Transportation Management System

TNC Transportation Network Company

TOD Transit-Oriented Development

TOS Transportation Operations Systems

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

VRF Vehicle Registration Fee

Item 3a

4

3 b EDR- Look-Ahead-Reportbw-dsrev 3/17/17

NOTE: Work regarding renewal of the Marin 1/2 cent transportation sales tax is not included in this chartAnticipated Timing

PLANNING• Board to consider Draft Strategic Vision Plan for review and approval. Includes capturing Transportation Setting, Transportation Vision(including Innovation Workshop Recap), and Strategic Revenue element April • Participate as partner with Golden Gate and San Rafael (lead agencies) regarding environmental document and design of PermanentBettini Transit Center Relocation (Discussion) Ongoing• Hear Marin Transit Status Report and Plans for Update to their Short Range Transit Plan April• Present to TAM Board Draft Origin Destination Study Results March• Seek approval from TAM Board to submit Marin/Sonoma Bike Share System Grant Application (Action) May • Seek TAM Board approval of Next Steps for Sales Tax renewal and approval of Baseline Polling May • Finalize Agreement with LYFT for First/Last Mile rideshare pilot/ ilustrate marketing to TAM board and receive input May

PROJECT DELIVERY• Present regular updates on State Route 37 Project (Discussion item) Ongoing• Seek TAM Board approval of new 3-year Project Management On-Call Contract (Action) April• TAM staff reports on ongoing construction of Class II Bikeway Almonte/Shoreline (Action) April - June

• Take necessary steps to move into Construction of East Sir francis Drake approach improvements to Richmond San Rafael Bridge June• Provide Update to TAM board on status of Bellam Blvd Approach improvements to Richmond San Rafael Bridge June• Seek TAM Board approval of Design Contract services for Marin Sonoma Narrows- final project phases June

PROGRAMMING• Track and participate in County of Marin Environmental Studies and Preliminary Engineering for the Sir Francis Drake Boulevard Projectin the Central Marin Planning Area/Ross Valley Ongoing• Update Revenue and Expenditure Element of Measure A April/May• Announce Call for Projects for TDA/TFCA May• Allocate Measure A Funds for Transit June• Allocate Measure A Funds for Local Streets and Roads June• Program and allocate Measure B for Element 3.2 (TDM) and Element 3.3 (Alternative Fuel) May/June

FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION• Executive Committee and TAM Review of Draft FY2017-18 Annual Budget and Release it for Public Comments April• Adoption of the FY2017-18 Annual Budget May• Selection of Fund Recipients for the 2017 Measure A Transportaiton Sales Tax Compliance Audit June

LEGISLATION• Track 2017 legislation and considers adopting positions on new bills Ongoing

LOOK-AHEAD - ANTICIPATED MAJOR TAM BOARD ITEMS April - June 2017

Item 3b

5

THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY

6

MEETING OF THE TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN

TAM

FEBRUARY 23, 2017 7:00 PM

MARIN COUNTY CIVIC CENTER, ROOM 330 3501 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE SAN RAFAEL, CALIFORNIA

Page 1 of 9

MEETING MINUTES

Members Present: Stephanie Moulton-Peters, City of Mill Valley, TAM Chair Judy Arnold, Marin County Board of Supervisors, TAM Vice Chair Alice Fredericks, Tiburon Town Council Beach Kuhl, Ross Town Council Damon Connolly, Marin County Board of Supervisors Dan Hillmer, Larkspur City Council Diane Furst, Corte Madera Town Council Eric Lucan, Novato Town Council John Reed, Fairfax Town Council Kate Colin, Alternate, San Rafael City Council Katie Rice, Marin County Board of Supervisors Ray Withy, Sausalito City Council Tom McInerney, San Anselmo Town Council

Members Absent: Dennis Rodoni, Marin County Board of Supervisors Gary Phillips, San Rafael City Council James Campbell, Belvedere City Council Kathrin Sears, Marin County Board of Supervisors

Staff Members Present Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director Bill Whitney, Principal Project Delivery Manager Dan Cherrier, Principal Project Delivery Manager David Chan, Manager of Programming and Legislation Derek McGill, Planning Manager Li Zhang, Chief Financial Officer Nick Nguyen, Principal Project Delivery Manager Molly Graham, Public Outreach Coordinator Scott McDonald, Senior Transportation Planner

Chair Moulton-Peters called the meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. with all members present as indicated.

Item 6a

7

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN TAM February 23, 2017

Page 2 of 9

1. Chair’s Report (Discussion)

Chair Moulton-Peters briefly discussed with the Board the proper microphone etiquette to facilitate better communication at the meeting this evening. She also noted that a request has been made for the Board to use as few acronyms as possible. She requested that staff include the list of acronyms in every Board packet as a refresher for the Commissioners. She noted as well that the Executive Director’s report has a “look ahead” attachment, which will help the Board be aware of upcoming events, projects and reports.

Chair Moulton-Peters also reminded the Board of the TAM Innovation Workshop being held tomorrow, Friday, February 24 at the Embassy Suites and encouraged attendance, noting it is an opportunity to find out what technological advances are ahead and what’s possible in the world of transportation that may be important for Marin County to consider. She welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2. Commissioner Matters Not on the Agenda (Discussion)

No comments made.

3. Executive Director's Report (Discussion)

Executive Director (ED) Dianne Steinhauser began by thanking Caltrans for their good work with the flooding issue that occurred on Highway 37. She noted that the roadway was reopened the morning of this meeting, and she mentioned several drainage improvements that were made. She commented on her recent attendance at the California Transportation Foundation Forum in Sacramento, which included reporting on the many highways that were damaged in the recent rains and the many emergency projects, as well as the costs that Caltrans is facing from the winter weather. The CTF Forum also heard from Senator Beall and Assemblyman Frazier regarding state funding efforts. She indicated she would like to find some way to recognize Caltrans for their accomplishments particularly related to Highway 37.

ED Steinhauser also reviewed items in her written report, and she indicated copies were available on the dais, including the Innovation Workshop, pending transportation legislation at the state level, efforts by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission(MTC), to increase transportation funding- Regional Measure Three (RM3) priorities and possibilities, federal funding options, and finally, she mentioned that copies of the TAM Citizens’ Oversight Committee (COC) annual report were available for any who wanted them.

a. Look Ahead Report

The report was included in the agenda packet, and reference to it was given by staff and the TAM Chair.

b. Richmond San Rafael (RSR) Bridge Third Lane & Multi-use Path Report

Staff reported work continuing on the construction of the Third Lane Eastbound, scheduled to be open to traffic in November 2017.

There was no public comment on the Executive Director Report.

Item 6a

8


Page 3 of 9

4. Commissioner Reports (Discussion)

a. Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) Report

Commissioner Connolly reported that a new chair was appointed for MTC, Jake Mackenzie, who represents Sonoma County and its cities. He noted this was good for the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) because the four counties (Marin, Sonoma, Napa and Solano) work together often. He also announced that the next day there will be a joint meeting of MTC’s Planning Committee and the Administrative Committee of the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), to continue to discuss the contract for services related to the merger of the two bodies, as well as a Memorandum of Understanding. Thirdly, he commented on the RM3 process, including input from the public, MTC, and the member jurisdictions of TAM, but also the Legislature. He agreed with ED Steinhauser that MTC is being asked to slow down the process somewhat, but they have undertaken some stakeholder meetings. Finally, he discussed his upcoming trip to Washington for the National Cities and Counties meeting and lobbying efforts at the federal level

b. Marin Transit Report

Commissioner Rice indicated she had nothing to report, as the Marin Transit meeting was set to occur next week.

c. Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART)

Vice Chair Arnold reported that SMART has a new set of officers, which she reviewed, with Deb Fudge, Mayor of the Town of Windsor, as Chair, and Kate Sears, Marin County Supervisor – District 2, as Vice Chair. She also updated the Board on SMART’s status in testing the running of the trains, testing of positive train control, the Larkspur extension and the Bettini Transit Center. Commissioner Rice asked, and Vice Chair Arnold confirmed that the tests being run measure frequency and speed similar to final settings.

5. Open Time for Public Expression

No comments made.

6. CONSENT CALENDAR (Action)a. Approval of TAM Draft Meeting Minutes of January 26, 2017b. Reprogram PCA funds from OBAG 2c. Program Measure A Reserve Funds in the Measure A Strategic Pland. Adopt CEQA Findings for the East Sir Francis Drake Blvd Project Approaching the Richmond-San

Rafael Bridge

Vice Chair Arnold moved to approve the Consent Calendar, and Commissioner Fredericks seconded the motion.

The motion was approved with one abstention by Commissioner Kate Colin.

Item 6a

9


Page 4 of 9

7. Regional Measure Three (RM3) – Potential Bridge Toll Increase (Discussion) ED Steinhauser introduced this discussion item, beginning with a review of MTC’s planned stakeholder and public meetings, outreach through the Legislature in Sacramento as well as outreach in the Bay Area. She indicated that all the counties are planning to submit candidate projects to MTC through their Congestion Management Agencies, including TAM. Staff is seeking input on potential projects, and she reminded the Board of the presentations made at its January meeting. She also introduced what was planned for this meeting and gave a preview of intended topics for March. She commented as well on the types of projects that MTC will be seeking.

a. Direct Connector from Northbound Highway 101 to Eastbound I-580

Project Manager Nick Nguyen began the staff report with a discussion of background information, project location, daily traffic volumes, peak hour traffic volumes, justification for the Hwy 101/I580 freeway to freeway direct connector, introduction of the three preliminary concepts developed by staff, and estimated cost ranges. He noted that this is very early in the process and more study will be done over the next year with updates for the Board through the process. ED Steinhauser briefly reviewed input received from the City of San Rafael related to the Hwy 101/I-580 Direct Connector, noting their acceptance of the hillside option due to no general impacts on businesses, and support for the low speed option essentially elevating the offramp over Bellam- due to its minor impacts on businesses and its benefits to Bellam. Commissioner Lucan asked if staff had ranked the three project options in order of cost estimates and how much time savings the commuters would realize, which staff discussed. Mr. Nguyen indicated that Concept 2, the low speed connector, was the lowest cost estimate at $135 million, Concept 3, the moderate speed connector, was estimated at $184 million and Concept 1- the Hillside Connector- was the highest cost estimate at $255 million. Regarding time savings for each concept, ED Steinhauser stated that time savings was similar for all three, with more analysis showing this in detail. Staff noted there would be benefits on both Bellam and East Francisco Blvds., along with Sir Francis Drake, since motorists would no longer need to use the Bellam exit to get to the bridge, and bypass I-580 congestion by travelling down east Francisco to the Main Street entrance onto I-580. She added that it is likely that traffic would also be reduced on Sir Francis Drake Blvd. in the Larkspur Landing Area. This reduction in congestion would benefit those riding both SMART and the Golden Gate Ferry.

Commissioner Rice discussed current freeway short-cut takers that contribute to congestion on surface streets, which, potentially, would not be a problem if there is a direct connector in place.

Commissioner Colin thanked ED Steinhauser for her summary of the discussion with San Rafael. She asked why out of eight scenarios that were originally presented, the three that were chosen were all in San Rafael. Mr. Nguyen explained that all eight were on the San Rafael side, none were from Larkspur because it was not viable to approach the bridge using a high-speed connector from that direction.

Commissioner Colin noted that San Rafael was concerned because the numbers keep changing for the different options, as well as the potential visual impacts for the middle scenario. She added that the City supports the hillside or possibly the lower speed curved option over Concept 2, the higher speed connector. Commissioner Reed questioned whether the available area and proposed lane widths on the Westbound Sir Francis Drake Blvd. exit from the foot of the Richmond bridge would fit and still meet Caltrans standards for shoulders, etc. Mr. Nguyen stated all the scenarios provide for the replacement of that SFDrake existing structure, which will allow for more lanes than currently can fit. ED Steinhauser recalled the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program review of the intersection of Andersen and Sir Francis Drake that showed significant difficulties for bicycles and

Item 6a

10


Page 5 of 9

transit vehicles to travel in that area, resulting in a proposal for either grade separation or signalization of that intersection. She noted that the replacement of the structure will allow for the intersection to be updated at the same time. Commissioner Reed acknowledged it was good to include necessary work that area. Commissioner Hillmer asked whether there was any benefit analysis in terms of benefit created and congestion relief for the three concepts. Mr. Nguyen responded that based on preliminary analysis and modeling, they generate the same benefit for each scenario. Commissioner McInerney said it would be helpful to get a clearer explanation in the future of the concerns that San Rafael has with the second option, such as if there will be any congestion remaining in the area, what types and how many businesses will be affected, etc. Mr. Nguyen reviewed the factors that were considered in rating the different options, and he confirmed the costs for any business relocation and impact mitigation were included for each scenario. Commissioner McInerney also asked whether added congestion was considered for the area coming up the hill on Hwy 101 from Larkspur. Mr. Nguyen confirmed that part of the scope of the study was modeling of potential traffic impacts. ED Steinhauser added that Commissioner McInerney was correct that there would be impacts, but she noted that freeway traffic flows better than city streets with signalization and other traffic controls. She reiterated that traffic studies would be done to evaluate all potential impacts. Commissioner Hillmer questioned whether the traffic improvements will be significant enough to redirect the traffic on the connector and not tempt drivers to take surface streets instead. Mr. Nguyen confirmed there would be new signage and channelization to direct drivers correctly. Commissioner Connolly questioned whether the completion of the northbound Hwy 101 to eastbound I-580 connector will result in Caltrans requiring the construction of a connector for westbound 580 to southbound 101. ED Steinhauser indicated while it may not be required, neither will any option pursued preclude the building of such a connector at some point in the future. Commissioner Connolly commented on the previously proposed “flyover” that was part of the Greenbrae project and the opposition from the community and if there were any similarities between the two projects, which ED Steinhauser discussed in terms of congestion relief with appropriate mitigation of the impacts. Commissioner Connolly discussed improvements to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge with the added third lane on one level and the bike access on the other, as well as improving traffic approaches from surface streets to the bridge. He asked how those changes will relieve congestion and how they will interrelate with the proposed connector. ED Steinhauser commented on the great partnering relationship that TAM has with the County of Marin and the Cities of Larkspur and San Rafael and efforts to develop a system that not only addresses surface street traffic issues but the needs of the commuter as well. Commissioner Furst also responded to Commissioner Connolly’s question about similarities with the Greenbrae project, noting that the Greenbrae interchange was never intended to increase the capacity of the freeway or relieve congestion trying to reach I-580. She discussed, as well, the concerns of Corte Madera residents regarding the need for congestion relief, particularly on surface streets, which this project addresses. Commissioner Rice noted that although there will be some relief from the proposed interim connections currently planned and to be built soon between the freeways, there are current traffic backups on 101 which will continue to be an issue to the south of the Greenbrae area.

Item 6a

11


Page 6 of 9

Commissioner Moulton-Peters noted the issues with not having a high speed 101/580 connection are felt throughout the county including southern Marin. She commented on efforts among the jurisdictions of Belvedere, Tiburon and Mill Valley to meet to see what they can do about congestion in their shared overpass area, as well has the cumulative effect of traffic backups from one area to the next.

b. Bike/Pedestrian Pathway Improvements

Senior Planner Scott McDonald presented this part of the staff report, discussing bicycle/pedestrian needs in the toll corridor, as identified from various sources, input from advocacy groups, key regional bicycle/pedestrian needs as put forth to MTC independently from Bay Trails, considerations when identifying and evaluating needs, and four specific projects to address those needs. ED Steinhauser discussed the purpose of the temporary Transit Center in San Rafael and its role in integrating several bike/ped projects. She also noted that MTC will likely have a category for bicycle and pedestrian projects but may not be looking for specific candidates at this time. Commissioner Furst spoke in support of the Central Marin Regional Gap Closure project, which is primarily in Corte Madera but partially in Larkspur as well. She reported that the two cities worked together to submit the project three times for Active Transportation Program (ATP) funding, at the regional level and at the state. She indicated the project scored well all three times but didn’t quite make the cutoff. She asked that it be considered by TAM under RM3. Commissioner Reed discussed a major gap in the east-west corridor just west of the Transit Center; he thought it should be considered as well. Chair Moulton-Peters asked for clarification on the area Commissioner Reed was discussing, and he confirmed it was where Second and Fourth Streets merge together in San Rafael. Commissioner Colin reiterated the need to construct the multi-use path from Second Street to Andersen, especially with SMART coming to San Rafael and then extending to Larkspur. She was appreciative of it being included. Chair Moulton-Peters opened public comment on the item. Bjorn Griepenburg, Marin County Bicycle Coalition (MCBC), expressed appreciation to staff for the recognition of bicycle/pedestrian projects, expressing support for all the ones cited by staff. He indicated the multi-use path from Second to Andersen, was of the highest priority to MCBC. He also commented on the importance of major safety improvements in downtown San Rafael, an area that serves one of the most vulnerable populations in the Bay Area. Maureen Gaffney, San Francisco Bay Trails Project, thanked staff for reaching out to them and for hearing their concerns. She noted that the projects discussed with TAM were in the context of the RM3 Toll program. She acknowledged that there were other important projects not included, but indicated she was pleased with the projects that were included. Seeing no further speakers, Chair Moulton-Peters closed public comment on the item.

c. Highway 101 / Local Road Interchange Improvements in the Vicinity of the Toll Corridor

ED Steinhauser began the presentation discussing past analysis of various interchanges and noted that Project Manager Bill Whitney would report on the proposed improvements that were proposed by the various jurisdictions along Highway 101.

Item 6a

12


Page 7 of 9

Mr. Whitney discussed background information for each of the projects – Tiburon Blvd / East Blithedale Interchange, Paradise/ Tamalpais Drive Interchange, San Rafael Onramp at 2nd Street and Hetherton, Merrydale / North San Pedro Road Interchange, Manuel Freitas Parkway Interchange, and the Lucas Valley / Smith Ranch Road Interchange. Regarding the Tamalpais Drive Interchange, Commissioner Furst expressed appreciation for the concept of an auxiliary lane coming onto the freeway and discussed how it would work. She noted that having an auxiliary lane at this location could relieve congestion for a long way after the interchange itself. She also agreed with Mr. Whitney that Caltrans has identified serious ADA deficiencies with the interchange. Commissioner Furst further explained that Corte Madera has been approached by Skidmore, Owings, and Merrill in San Francisco offering pro bono design work for the ADA needs at the interchange. She acknowledged there will be a need for funding, however, while Caltrans has earmarked $8 million, the project will cost more than that. Chair Moulton-Peters asked whether the categories with multiple projects will come back to the Board before being submitted to MTC. ED Steinhauser noted there are no cost estimates for some of the projects yet, so it is difficult to say. She asked for more time for staff to discuss and decide how best to present them to MTC. Chair Moulton-Peters asked if the same is true for the bike/ped projects, or will they be presented separately. ED Steinhauser said MTC is looking a candidate pool.

d. Highway 101 Related Transit Access and Efficiency-Related Capital Improvements

ED Steinhauser discussed the brief analysis and conclusions reached by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission in 2015 regarding express buses and park-and-ride lots in Marin. Specifically, MTC focused on Rowland Blvd. and Smith Ranch Road, but a number of other areas of need were not addressed, so TAM embarked on a separate analysis to forward to MTC, which was done.

Planning Manager Derek McGill reviewed the background of MTC’s Managed Lanes Implementation Program (MLIP), its goals, Marin Transit’s MLIP transit access improvements, three Marin projects identified by MLIP, proposed additional park-and-ride sites to address access issues, TAM’s list of Revised Marin MLIP Transit Projects, a potential bus-on-shoulder project and examples from another jurisdiction similar to Marin, benefits, Caltrans’ announcement of a pilot bus-on-shoulder program in 2016, and TAM’s submission of a Letter of Interest in January 2017 for a Caltrans Bus on Shoulder Pilot. Commissioner Lucan asked about the bus-on-shoulder concept and how constraints on the highway will affect Marin’s ability to implement such a program. Mr. McGill commented that the buses could use some areas of shoulder north of North San Pedro road on Highway 101 where shoulders exist. ED Steinhauser was optimistic based on Caltrans’ consideration of the concept. She pointed out that the highway in Marin south of San Rafael does not have shoulders to utilize. For the northern section, however, the possibility is there, and ED Steinhauser commented that ridership could increase as a result of implementing this program. ED Steinhauser concluded the presentations by noting there would be contrast-and-compare information presented at the March meeting with a staff goal of Board action on groups of priorities for RM3 inclusion.

Item 6a

13


Page 8 of 9

8. Adopt Next Steps and Timeline for Engaging in Sales Tax Renewal Effort (Action) ED Steinhauser presented the staff report and recommended that the TAM Board consider possible next steps and a timeline for a sales tax renewal process. She reviewed discussions that have begun on the topic, the current plan for public outreach/education, specifically presentations being made to local cities and towns, and the need for TAM to determine next steps in the process, which will help the local jurisdictions know what to expect. She noted the presentation made to the Executive Committee and changes made as a result, decision points in the process whereupon the TAM Board can decide not to go any further, whether to form an expenditure committee, and opportunities for local councils and the BOS to have input all along the way. Commissioner Fredericks expressed hope that by the time TAM has to make the final decision, there will be a better understanding of federal and state funding that may be available for local jurisdictions. ED Steinhauser said she thought it would be possible by June for regional and state funding, but federal funding is trickier. Commissioner Fredericks moved to approve the next steps and timeline for Engaging in Sales Tax Renewal Effort. Commissioner Arnold seconded the motion. It was unanimously approved. 9. Consider Approval of Polling Effort to Capture Transportation Needs and Priorities (Action) ED Steinhauser presented the staff report recommending that the TAM Board authorize a baseline poll regarding transportation needs and priorities to be conducted in the April-May timeframe, of approximately 700 likely voters, at a cost not to exceed $45,000. Funds are available for this effort. She discussed the timing of the poll, its purpose, numbers to be polled, anticipated costs, a court case in 1999 that tested and confirmed it is acceptable to test revenue scenarios in the polling if they realistically present the positives and the negatives associated, and the basis for the cost estimates (that are consistent with similar efforts in the past). In response to a question from Chair Moulton-Peters, ED Steinhauser noted there will be an Ad hoc group comprised of TAM Commissioners that will directly review the poll questions and will be managing the poll. Chair Moulton-Peters reviewed the six Commissioners that are serving on the Ad hoc group which includes Commissioners Connolly, Fredericks, Lucan, Phillips, Rice, and the TAM Chair Moulton-Peters. Vice Chair Arnold discussed a question that arose at the Executive Committee meeting regarding the timing of the poll, which she explained noting that a baseline poll is needed prior to education and outreach which would lead up to a second poll later testing revenue scenarios. She also recalled a comment made regarding the importance of considering what negative issues might come up during the campaign. Commissioner Reed commented on the possible numbers of people who will be polled, and he expressed concern that the additional responses (such as online) be tracked to avoid the potential skewing of the results. ED Steinhauser indicated the polling consultant would be aware of normalizing for any skews. Commissioner Colin was appreciative of the Ad hoc’s role and the poll respondents’ willingness to participate. Commissioner Rice acknowledged there is a self-selection process in terms of who responds to the poll, but that is why the earlier surveys, etc., were necessary and helpful.

Item 6a

14


Page 9 of 9

Commissioner Fredericks moved to approve the staff recommendation. Commissioner Lucan seconded the motion, which was unanimously approved. 10. Caltrans Report (Discussion) ED Steinhauser noted that current stormy weather conditions have impacted Caltrans’ workload, and she commended them again for their quick response to Highway 37’s needs. She acknowledged there are many more areas in Marin that need attention. She also noted staff is hoping to have a Caltrans representative present at an upcoming meeting. Chair Moulton-Peters opened public comment on the item. Jean Severinghaus reported that Caltrans District 4 just went live on-line with a survey of where individuals would like to be able to cross Highway 101 on a bicycle. She asked the Commissioners to share the url link with their constituents. Seeing no further speakers, Chair Moulton-Peters closed public comment on the item. The meeting was adjourned at 9:05 pm.

Item 6a

15


16

DATE: March 23, 2017 TO: Transportation Authority of Marin Board of Commissioners FROM: Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director

Li Zhang, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Award of a $5,000 Grant to the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce in Support of its 2016-

2017 Leadership Class Emergency Bicycle Repair Fixit Station Project (Action) - Agenda Item No. 6b

RECOMMENDATION: The TAM Board awards a one-time $5,000 grant to the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce in support of its 2016-2017 Leadership Class Emergency Bicycle Repair Fixit Station Project. BACKGROUND: The San Rafael Chamber of Commerce (SRCOC) is a member-based business advocacy organization providing a strong voice in support of the economic vitality of the City and surrounding communities. To ensure we hear the voice of our business community on various transportation issues and gain its support for vital transportation projects/programs, TAM has been a member of the SRCOC since 2011. The San Rafael Leadership Institute (SRLI) is Marin County's premier leadership development program for professionals seeking to make a difference in their community, expand their network, and understand Marin from the ground up. For nearly 30 years, SRLI has been offering a singular opportunity to develop leadership and team-building skills while learning about current issues that impact Marin County. The program brings together many of Marin's policy makers and provides participants the chance to build relationships with key stakeholders in the county. In addition to a full-day session each month which focuses on various issues in the communities, each year the leadership class also conceives of and carries out a class project, which is an integral component of the SRLI experience. Even though they are small-scale projects, they are developed to help address the top five priorities identified in the communities by the SRCOC, including traffic congestion, sustainability, homelessness, workforce development and affordable housing. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: After several months of research and planning, the 2016-2017 Class decided on its Emergency Bicycle Repair Fixit Station Project, under the principle that it will help address at least two of the top priorities: traffic congestion and sustainability. The Class is planning to implement up to three stations in the surrounding community with two sites already identified: the Pickleweed Community Center and San Rafael City Library. The Class believes the selection of the two sites will also assist with workforce development since it will allow the low-income population in the neighborhoods nearby an affordable alternative way to maintain their daily commuter tool, the bike. The Class plans to launch those stations and have a celebration/outreach event during

17

TAM Board, Item 6b Page 2 of 2 March 23, 2017

the National Bike to Work Week, which is May 15-19. As a benefit of having Mr. Rob Devincenzi, Publisher of Marin IJ in the 2016-2017 Class, the Marin IJ has committed to publish two editorials to cover this effort. The Class will also reach out to other media outlets for extensive coverage of the event, which will highlight the support of all partners. The Class has, as well, full support of the City of San Rafael Public Works Department. During the research and outreach process, the Class also learned that the Marin County Bicycle Coalition (MCBC) is in the process of launching a countywide Emergency Bicycle Repair Fixit Station Project, which is expected to start in the summer of 2017. MCBC has agreed to take on the maintenance of the stations that the Class installs. FISCAL CONSIDERATION: TAM provides small grants to organizations in supportive of efforts that are in agreement with TAM’s Mission. Sufficient funds are budgeted under the Measure B Element 3 - Reduce Congestion & Pollution Category to support this effort. NEXT STEPS: Develop funding agreement between SRCOC and TAM. ATTACHMENTS: Brochure of the Emergency Bicycle Repair Fixit Station

18

© 2016 Dero

Today’s Service StationThe Fixit includes all the tools necessary to perform basic bike repairs and maintenance, from changing a flat to adjusting brakes and derailleurs. The tools and air pump are securely attached to the stand with stainless steel cables and tamper-proof fasteners. Hanging the bike from the hanger arms allows the pedals and wheels to spin freely while making adjustments.

Patents D680,914 S1 and US 9,498,880 B2

FIXIT Item 6b - Attachment

19

www.dero.com | 1-888-337-6729

© 2016 Dero© 2016 Dero

FIXIT

Hanger arms accommodate most types of bikes

Hanger arms can be mounted at 12, 3, 6, or 9 o’clock

Hanger is ADA compliant

Large surface area for sponsorship, branding, or way-finding signage

Pump holster can be mounted on either side or back of Fixit

Pump hose is reinforced for maximum protection

Pump head accommodates Presta and Schrader valve stem types

Tools are secured with braided stainless steel aircraft cables

QR code takes smart phone users to comprehensive bike repair web site

Includes most commonly used tools for simple bike maintenance

Screwdrivers and Allen Wrenches are on swivel connectors for easier use

Hanger and pump (shipped as 2nd package) pack inside main body for easy, inexpensive shipping

FINISH OPTIONSGalvanized Stainless

Tools included:Philips and flat head screwdrivers2.5, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8mm Allen wrenchesHeadset wrenchPedal wrench8, 9, 10, 11mm box wrenchesTire levers (2)

Powder Coat

Thermoplastic

Black Light GrayRAL 7042

Deep RedRAL 3003

YellowRAL 1023

White

Hunter GreenRAL 6005

CNH Bright Yellow OrangeRAL 2004

Light GreenRAL 6018

GreenRAL 6016

Sepia BrownRAL 8014

Bronze Silver9007

Dark Purple Flat Black Wine RedRAL 3005

BeigeRAL 1001

Iron Gray7011

Black Green Red Gray Brown

Item 6b - Attachment

20


Li Zhang, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Review and Approval of FY2017-18 Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle

Registration Fee Revenue Estimates and Budget Development Schedule (Action) - Agenda Item No. 6c

RECOMMENDATION: The TAM Board reviews and accepts the recommended FY2017-18 revenue levels for the Measure A ½ Cent Transportation Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee and the Budget Development Schedule. The Finance and Policy Executive Committee reviewed staff’s recommendation at its March 13, 2017 meeting and voted unanimously to refer the item to the TAM Board for approval. BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Article VI, Section 106.1 of the TAM Administrative Code, no later than its June meeting of each year, the TAM Board shall adopt the annual budget for the following fiscal year. For the annual budget development of TAM and its member agencies, staff develops and the TAM Board adopts the Measure A ½ Cent Sales tax and the Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee revenue levels in March of every year. The approval of the expected fund levels in March allows fund recipients time to build these local revenue dollars into their budget processes for FY2017-18. These revenue estimates will also be used to update the revenue and expenditure elements in the Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee Strategic Plans, which will guide the FY2017-18 programming and allocation process, and the establishment of contract levels for all projects and programs under both measures. After the review and approval of the Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee revenue estimates by the FP Executive Committee and TAM Board, staff will develop the draft FY2017-18 Annual Budget, present it for review at the April FP Executive Committee meeting, and release for the 30-day public review and comments period at the April Board meeting, and request the TAM Board to adopt the final draft at the May Board Meeting. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: Recommended FY2017-18 Measure A Revenue Estimate: Taxable sales collection is one of the main indicators of the strength of the economy and consumer confidence. TAM’s Measure A revenue collected peaked in FY2007-08 at $22.33 million, then suffered significant loss and reached its bottom in FY2009-10 at $18.82 million. It since has been growing steadily and reached a new peak

21

TAM Board, Item 6c Page 2 of 5 March 23, 2017

in FY2015-16 at $25.70 million. Detailed technical analyses of the quarterly disbursements by HdL Companies, the consulting team that TAM engaged for sales tax trend analyses and annual revenue estimates, suggested that TAM will collect about $25.90 million in FY2016-17, which is very close to the $25.77 million budgeted for the year. The chart below illustrates budgeted Measure A revenues versus actual annual collection between FY2005-06 and FY2016-17.

Attachment 1 is the Five-Year Measure A ½ Sales Tax Projection provided by HdL based on its comprehensive technical analyses of the County’s taxable sales data. HdL’s projections show that sales tax revenue growth rate for Marin from FY2015-16 to FY2016-17 is only 1%, compared to the 5.2% statewide growth rate released by BOE in June 2016, and growth rate from FY2016-17 to FY2017-18 is 2.6%, compared to the 4.4% statewide growth rate released by the Board of Equalization (BOE) on January 17, 2017. Details of the BOE taxable sales growth projection is provided in the report as Attachment 2. HdL also cautioned all its clients that its projections have not reflected any potential significant negative adjustments for a future economic downturn which is anticipated by many economic forecasters. Staff developed the three scenarios for the FY2017-18 Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax based on these various information sources.

Scenario # Assumption In Millions Scenario 1: Conservative Holding at the FY2016-17 estimated revenue level $ 25.96 Scenario 2: Moderate Use HdL’s FY2017-18 Estimate (2.6% growth rate) $ 26.64 Scenario 3: Aggressive Use BOE’s Statewide Growth rate (4.4% growth rate) $ 27.10

To continue TAM’s prudent and conservative approach, staff recommends that the TAM Board use the conservative scenario and adopt the FY2017-18 Measure A Sales Tax revenue level at $25.96 million. If the

22


revenue level comes in above the adopted budget level, staff recommends that the TAM Board directs the excess funding to replenish the $1.88 million reserve fund that was released in December 2016. The release of the reserve fund allowed Marin Transit to meet its urgent fund needs and award the contract for the Redwood and Grant Bus Facility in Novato. The TAM Board also directed some of the reserve funds to the TAM Junction Project.

Any excess revenue after the fully replenish of the reserve fund will then be made available to project/program sponsors in the following year as prior year carryover funds. Staff will also actively monitor the sales tax revenue trend and any potential economic downturn timely with support from HdL and update the Board if any negative adjustments are necessary. Recommended FY2017-18 Measure B Revenue Estimate: Measure B, the $10 Vehicle Registration Fee revenue dedicated to transportation projects and programs, was passed by Marin voters in November 2010. Collection of this much needed new local revenue source started on May 2, 2011. Chart 2 illustrates the revenue collection of Measure B VRF from FY2012 to FY2016. As for the current fiscal year, total Measure B cash disbursement for the eight-month period, as of February 2017, is $1.63 million, slightly higher than the $1.56 million for the same period of last year. Budgeted Measure B revenue for the current year is $2.35 million. Staff believes that actual revenue will be close to the $2.35 million budgeted based on the increasing trend of registered vehicles in the County.

The table below illustrates the history of the number of registered fee-paid vehicles in Marin County. As you can see from Table 1, the number of registered vehicles in Marin County has been decreasing from 2008 to 2012 but had a 2.29% increase from 2012 to 2013, 0.89% increase from 2013 to 2014, and then 1.14% increase from 2014 to 2015. However, as observed from prior years, revenue collected was always less than what’s suggested by the number of registered vehicles in the County, probably due to delinquent payments. In this case, staff would like to recommend keeping the FY2017-18 Measure B revenue at $2.35 million.

23


Recommended FY2017-18 Budget Development Schedule: The table below illustrates the proposed schedule for the FY2017-18 budget development process.

Table 2: TAM FY2017-18 Budget Development Schedule Activity Time Frame

TAM Executive Committee and Board Review and Approve the Measure A and Measure B Revenue Estimates for FY2016-17 Annual Budget Development

March, 2017

Revise/Refine Draft Budget and Present to TAM Executive Committee and Board and release for 30 day comment period

April/May, 2017

Present to Marin Manager’s Association

Release for public comments and set public hearing in May

Conduct Public Hearing and Present Proposed Budget to TAM Board May 25, 2017

Public hearing is held at the beginning of the meeting

Board considers adoption of budget as a regular agenda item, pending the close of 30-day public comment period

Finalize Budget and Input into TAM’s new Financial System June 15, 2017

Incorporate additional changes/comments from Board adoption

Input the final budget into the Financial System

Year Registered Vehicle Annual # Change Annual % Change2000 232,450 N/A N/A2001 235,679 3,229 1.39%2002 239,689 4,010 1.70%2003 232,712 -6,977 -2.91%2004 243,499 10,787 4.64%2005 238,045 -5,454 -2.24%2006 242,478 4,433 1.86%2007 242,953 475 0.20%2008 241,308 -1,645 -0.68%2009 240,466 -842 -0.35%2010 240,345 -121 -0.05%2011 235,891 -4,454 -1.85%2012 235,535 -356 -0.15%2013 240,921 5,386 2.29%2014 243,069 2,148 0.89%2015 245,849 2,780 1.14%Data Source: DMV Forecasting Unit

Year 2000 -2015Table 1: DMV Estimated Marin County Fee Paid Vehicle Registration

24


FISCAL CONSIDERATION: The estimated revenues will be used to determine the FY2017-18 programming/allocation and contract levels for various projects and programs under both the Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee revenue measures. NEXT STEPS: After the review and approval of the Measure A ½ Cent Sales Tax and Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee revenue estimates by the Finance and Policy Executive Committee and TAM Board, staff will develop the draft FY2017-18 Annual Budget, present it for review at the April Finance and Policy Executive Committee meeting, and release it for public review and comments at the April Board Meeting. The TAM Board will conduct a public hearing and adopt the final budget at its May 2017 Meeting. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Marin County Five-Year Sales Tax Projection – HdL Companies Attachment 2: Board of Equalization Estimated Statewide Taxable Sales Growth

25


26

MARIN COUNTY MEASURE AEXTENDED TRANSACTIONS AND USE TAX BUDGET ESTIMATE

FY 2015-16 FY 2016-17 FY 2017-18 FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2021-22Industry Group Actuals Projection % Projection % Projection % Projection % Projection % Projection %Autos & Transportation 4,480,769 4,500,233 0.4% 4,573,233 1.6% 4,664,733 2.0% 4,758,033 2.0% 4,853,233 2.0% 4,853,233 0.0%Building & Construction 2,732,545 2,742,665 0.4% 2,824,865 3.0% 2,937,865 4.0% 3,055,365 4.0% 3,177,565 4.0% 3,272,865 3.0%Business & Industry 4,445,592 4,438,938 -0.1% 4,543,338 2.4% 4,634,238 2.0% 4,726,938 2.0% 4,821,438 2.0% 4,917,838 2.0%Food & Drugs 1,987,226 2,006,808 1.0% 2,056,908 2.5% 2,108,308 2.5% 2,161,008 2.5% 2,215,008 2.5% 2,270,408 2.5%Fuel & Service Stations 1,800,040 1,662,794 -7.6% 1,824,194 9.7% 1,878,894 3.0% 1,935,294 3.0% 1,993,394 3.0% 2,053,194 3.0%General Consumer Goods 7,235,974 7,278,609 0.6% 7,332,009 0.7% 7,478,609 2.0% 7,628,209 2.0% 7,780,809 2.0% 7,858,609 1.0%Restaurants & Hotels 3,277,945 3,439,855 4.9% 3,594,655 4.5% 3,738,455 4.0% 3,887,955 4.0% 4,043,455 4.0% 4,205,155 4.0%Transfers & Unidentified 39,957 53,588 34.1% 53,588 0.0% 53,588 0.0% 53,588 0.0% 53,588 0.0% 53,588 0.0%Total 26,000,047 26,123,489 0.5% 26,802,789 2.6% 27,494,689 2.6% 28,206,389 2.6% 28,938,489 2.6% 29,484,889 1.9%Administration Cost (303,210) (312,281) (321,633) (329,936) (338,477) (347,262) (353,819)Total 25,696,837 25,811,208 0.4% 26,481,155 2.6% 27,164,753 2.6% 27,867,912 2.6% 28,591,227 2.6% 29,131,070 1.9%60-Day Accrual Adjustment 6,100 151,700 154,600 159,000 163,600 122,100 124,300 With 60-Day Accrual 25,702,937 25,962,908 1.0% 26,635,755 2.6% 27,323,753 2.6% 28,031,512 2.6% 28,713,327 2.4% 29,255,370 1.9%

CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION - DO NOT COPY OR DISTRIBUTE WITHOUT AUTHORIZATIONHdL · 909.861.4335 · www.hdlcompanies.com2/21/2017 9:59 AM Prepared: 2/20/17 By: rls

Item 6c - Attachment 1

27


28

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE BOARD OF EQUALIZATION450 N STREET, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA PO BOX 942879, SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 94279-0067 1-916-445-0840 • FAX 1-916-445-7119 www.boe.ca.gov

January 17, 2017 TO: CITY AND COUNTY FINANCE OFFICIALS Continuing the practice of past years, we are making available to you recently estimated statewide growth rates to assist in your coming budget preparations. The table below shows preliminary or estimated statewide changes in taxable sales for the first quarter of calendar year 2016 through the second quarter of calendar year 2018:

Year to Year Change In Taxable Sales (Percent Change from Allocations Received Sales Period Same Period of Prior Year) by Local Jurisdictions

Jan. - Mar. 2016 4.0 (prelim.) Mar. - June 2016 Apr. - June 2016 2.4 (prelim.) June - Sept. 2016 July - Sept. 2016 0.4 (prelim.) Sept. - Dec 2016 Oct. - Dec. 2016 5.7 (est.) Dec. 2016 - Mar. 2017 Jan. - Mar. 2017 2.8 (est.) Mar. - June 2017 Apr. - June 2017 3.0 (est.) June - Sept. 2017 July - Sept. 2017 4.5 (est.) Sept. - Dec. 2017 Oct. - Dec. 2017 4.4 (est.) Dec. 2017 - Mar. 2018 Jan. - Mar. 2018 4.2 (est.) Mar. - June 2018 Apr. - June 2018 4.6 (est.) June - Sept. 2018

The Department of Finance made these growth estimates in January 2017 in conjunction with its preparation of the 2017-18 Governor’s Budget. If you would like to be added to the distribution list to receive this letter electronically, please provide your email address to us at: [email protected]

Sincerely,

/s/ Mark Durham Mark Durham, Chief Research and Statistics MD:jf:jm

SEN. GEORGE RUNNER (RET.) First District, Lancaster

FIONA MA, CPA

Second District, San Francisco

JEROME E. HORTON Third District, Los Angeles County

DIANE L. HARKEY

Fourth District, Orange County

BETTY T. YEE State Controller

_______

DAVID J. GAU Executive Director

Item 6c - Attachment 2

29

mailto:[email protected]


30

DATE: March 23, 2017 TO: Transportation Authority of Marin Board of Commissioners FROM: Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director Bill Whitney, Deputy Executive Director

SUBJECT: Accept Construction Contract for the Brookdale Avenue Visual Mitigation Project –

(Action), Agenda Item No. 6d RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Executive Director accept the work completed under the construction contract and begin the five-year plant establishment period. Because the plant establishment period and associated maintenance is a contract requirement the current contract will remain open with the contractor until the plant establishment period is complete. Following successful completion and compliance with the requirements outline in the construction documents a Notice of Completion will be filed with the Marin County Clerk’s Office. The Programming and Projects Executive Committee accepted this recommendation and forwarded it to the Board for Approval. BACKGROUND: On September 22, 2016, the Board authorized the Executive Director to execute a contract with the lowest responsible bidder Bortolussi & Watkin of San Rafael for the Brookdale Avenue Visual Mitigation Project. Shortly thereafter the contractor initiated work and diligently implemented the project in accordance with the project plans and specifications. TAM’s construction manager provided resident engineering and inspection services and confirmed the project is now complete. During the final design phase, and prior to construction, TAM staff facilitated an arrangement between the City of San Rafael and Caltrans to address future maintenance of the vegetation, plantings and site restoration elements. The City of San Rafael agreed to accept maintenance responsibilities following a five-year plant establishment period that will be completed by the contractor. San Rafael agreed to accept the site for maintenance provided that Caltrans eliminated planned fencing around the site. Previous Board Actions: For further information on the Boards actions the staff reports can be found using the following links. http://www.tam.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=10075 http://www.tam.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=8138 http://www.tam.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=9567

31

http://www.tam.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=10075



Page 2 of 2

TAM Board Item 6d March 23, 2017

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: With the successful implementation of TAM’s initial construction contract, staff is in the process of issuing payment to the contractor for work completed to date. The local landscape contractor will now be responsible to provide future services according to the “approved” Landscape Maintenance Work Plan for a five year period (plant establishment period). FISCAL CONSIDERATION: Caltrans will reimburse TAM for all project costs associated with implementation of the Mitigation Project, including design, construction, construction management and project management services provide by TAM staff. All costs and expenditures are within the budget outlined in the Caltrans / TAM Cooperative Funding Agreement. NEXT STEPS: TAM staff will need to provide a minimal amount of oversight to ensure the site is maintained according to the maintenance work plan. At the end of each of the five-year maintenance periods the contractor will be issued a lump sum payment according to the bid schedule. Staff will also facilitate the development of a maintenance agreement between the City of San Rafael and Caltrans to define partner’s roles and responsibilities following the five-year plant establishment period. ATTACHMENTS: None

32

DATE: March 23, 2017 TO: Transportation Authority of Marin Board of Commissioners FROM: Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director Molly Graham, Public Outreach Coordinator Scott McDonald, Senior Transportation Planner SUBJECT: Exercise First Second-Year Option on Contract with Transmetro to Manage TAM’s

Emergency Ride Home Program (Action), Agenda Item 6e RECOMMENDATION: Exercise the second of two available one-year options on the contract with Transmetro Inc. to extend outreach and management services for TAM’s Emergency Ride Home Program. This contract has a $45,000 annual budget, with funding for the next contract year available from Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee funds, Element 3.2 Commute Alternatives Programming.

BACKGROUND: The Marin Emergency Ride Home Program is a transportation demand management program designed to address concerns among commuters that use an alternative to driving alone regarding how to get home quickly, or in a different timeframe than afforded by their alternative mode of transportation, in case an unexpected situation arises such as a family or personal emergency. The program acts as a ‘safety net’ for employees that prefer to carpool, bike, take transit or walk to work locations but might, on occasion, have the need to access a more expeditious mode of transportation to get home. The program was implemented in Marin County in 2012 and is administered by the Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM). While trips home are seldom taken in times of emergencies, enrollment in the program has increased steadily due to its support as a ‘safety net’ for employees and while offered as a service at no cost for employers. Note the program as extended to upcoming SMART rail users, in July 2016. It also covers Marin transit and Golden gate Transit users, along with bike and ped commuters. Since 2012 outreach and marketing efforts by TAM staff and Transmetro, a transportation consulting company, have included an active enrollment campaign which has resulted in almost 200 employers (public and private sector) and over 16,000 Marin employees currently being enrolled in the program. Other on-going marketing efforts have included site visits/tabling at employers, distribution of posters and marketing materials, signage on Marin Transit and Golden Gate Transit, and a dedicated website with program information. In 2016 TransMetro helped reach out to employers to focus on recruitment of new employers and conduct interviews with existing participants to obtain/confirm: primary employer contact information, ideas and insights into how to enhance the program, and increase awareness and participation in the program.

33

TAM Board Meeting, Item 6e Page 2 of 3 March 23, 2017

As a result of this research, over the next year TAM staff is exploring increasing marketing around transit stations (with funding likely needed for advertisements at SMART stations), leveraging TNC companies and technology in order to make the program simpler to use (the program started out as an emergency taxi service, with recent increased requests demanding use of TNC – Uber/Lyft - trips home), and distribution of new marketing materials to highlight the program and available commute alternatives in Marin County (shown in the attachments to this item). DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: Prior to the program’s launch, TAM contracted with Transmetro, Inc. in October 2011 to jumpstart the program. Transmetro created and introduced the MarinERH.org website which has provided a cost-effective alternative to traditional programs which relied on vouchers for employers, and active staff registering of employers and employees. Nearly two years after the program launched, TAM staff issued a request for proposals for ongoing outreach and management services, and subsequently recommended a two-year contract with Transmetro, Inc. to manage TAM’s Emergency Ride Home Program. In February 2014 the TAM Board authorized a $90,000 contract which could be extended for two additional one-year terms with an annual budget of $45,000. The program has been funded from a combination of Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee funds - Element 3.2 Commute Alternatives Programming and Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) funding from the Air District. Over the first two-year period of this contract, 1/3 of funding came from the Air District’s TFCA Program, and over the past year was covered under the Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee funds - Element 3.2 Commute Alternatives Programming. After the initial two-year contract period ended in March 2016, staff is recommending that TAM exercise the first one-year option to extend the contract with Transmetro, Inc. for Emergency Ride Home Management services which was authorized one year ago. Particularly given that SMART’s operations will be beginning soon, staff views this program as an essential marketing tool and supportive public service to complement transit, encourage new transit use and retain ridership in the coming year. Therefore, the marketing materials and outreach strategy will be expanded to take advantage of new SMART riders but the underlying structure of the program will remain the same. In 2011, it was determined through a comprehensive review that TAM needed to retain a qualified professional consultant or firm to be responsible for the initial phase of employer outreach for the ERH program. As the program has matured, staff continues to promote the program as it supports vital investments such as the SMART, expansion of the bike network and will support TAM’s Lyft Pilot Partnership and the potential future buses on shoulders program. In the upcoming months, new provisions will be listed in program materials to include TNC services such as Uber and Lyft along with taxi services for emergency trips. Staff will continue to explore models for enhancing and expanding the program to incorporate additional TDM education services.

FISCAL CONSIDERATION: With a second-year option exercised, the contract would be funded with $45,000 in Measure B $10 Vehicle Registration Fee funds, Element 3.2 Commute Alternatives Programming. TAM will explore grant opportunities in the future to supplement local funding for this program as well.

34

TAM Board Meeting, Item 6e Page 3 of 3 March 23, 2017

ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: List of ERH Employers, registered as of February 15, 2017 Attachment B: Draft Emergency Ride Home Flyer Attachment C: Draft Getting Around Marin – Transportation Options

35


36

Employers Registered for the Marin Emergency Ride Home Program

As of February 15, 2017, over 16,000 employees working for 186 employers have registered for MARIN ERH Program. Following is a list of employers (as of 02/15/17):

Employer Location Employees 10,000 Degrees San Rafael 9

Aaero Heating & Air Conditioning Novato 5 Accolo Larkspur 16

Allied Mechanical San Rafael 21 American Red Cross San Rafael 112 Ashe Cosgrove, Inc Petaluma 13 Backyard Boogie San Rafael 2

Basis Architecture & Consulting San Rafael 6 Batteries Plus Bulbs San Rafael 5

Bay Area Discovery Museum Sausalito 75 Belli Deli San Rafael 8

Bio Plas, Inc San Rafael 15 BioCision Larkspur 50

BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. Novato 950 Biosearch Technologies Novato 10

Boerio Clark & Associate CPA's LLP Novato Boundary Solutions Inc Mill Valley 5

Brayton Purcell Novato 50 Bregante Company LLP Novato 13

Brouwer & Janachowski, LLC Tiburon 15 Buck Institute for Research on Aging Novato 260

Building Care Systems Novato 50 Butler, Shine, Stern & Partners Sausalito 170

California Department of Correction and Rehab San Quentin 4230 Casper & Biddle LLP San Rafael 15

Cavallo Point Sausalito 361 CellMark, Inc San Rafael 70

City of Larkspur Larkspur 40 City of Mill Valley Mill Valley 150

City of Novato Novato 184 City of San Rafael San Rafael 387 City of Sausalito Sausalito 124

Cocoyo San Rafael 5 Coleman Elementary San Rafael 29

College of Marin Kentfield 688 Comcast Mill Valley 100

Congregation Kol Shofar Tiburon 24 Copy Express San Rafael 9

Costello & Sons San Rafael 7 CP Lab Safety Novato 4

Crome Architecture San Rafael 20 Dan Fix Landscape Construction Co San Rafael 27

Item 6e - Attachment A

37

Darya G Ghafourpour, DDS San Rafael 3 David Stompe Insurance Agency Novato 2

Delicious Catering San Rafael 25 Dharma Trading Co San Rael 4 Digital Foundry, Inc Tiburon 30

Direct Dental Administrators Larkspur 4 Dominican University of California San Rafael 40

Double Rainbow Café San Rafael 13 Dowing Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc San Rafael 7

EASearch, LLC Sausalito 15 EcoTensil Corte Madera 10

EO Product San Rafael 15 ESP Business Services Mill Valley 50

Executive Support Service Sonoma 8 Fenix San Rafael 13 FICO San Rafael 270

Fireman's Fund Insurance Co. Novato 876 Focus Opticians San Anselmo 2

Four Winds West, Inc. Fairfax 8 Friedlander Cherwon Capper LLC San Rafael 19

Gary A Grablin DDS San Rafael 3 Gerken Capital Associates Mill Valley 30

Ghilotti Bros San Rafael 15 Glass Door Sausalito 130

Golden Gate Bridge, Hwy & Transportation District San rafael 500 Golden Years Medical San Rafael 7

Guide Dogs For The Blind San Rafael 189 H & R Block San Rafael 5

Hearth Home of Marin San Rafael 3 Herb's Pool Service Inc San Rafael 48

HL Commercial Real Estate San Rafael 15 Huckleberry Youth Programs San Rafael 27

IT GlobalNet Novato 27 Jean To-A-T San Rafael 2

Kappe & Du Architects San Rafael 5 KidSpex San Rafael 3

Kimbrell & Company Sausalito 2 Kiosk Novato 50

Larkspur-Corte Madera School District Larkspur 100 Lasallian Education Foundation Mill Valley 14 Law Office of David M Hellman San Rafael 3 Law Offices of Barbara A Rohan San Rafael 7 Law Offices of Michael Fiumara San Rafael 6

Lori Grace Tiburon 9 M. Dean Jones Architecture & Planning Tiburon 13

Maggiora Ghilotti San Rafael 5 Marin Academy San Rafael 95

Marin Biologic Lab Novato 20


38

Marin Builder Association San Rafael 4 Marin Center for Aesthetic Dentistry San Rafael 5

Marin Clean Energy San Rafael 33 Marin Community Foundation Novato 26 Marin County Bicycle Coalition Fairfax 20

Marin Financial Solutions San Rafael 5 Marin General Hospital Greenbrae 1500

Marin Law Center San Rafael 3 Marin Magazine Sausalito 8

Marin Mazda & Subaru San Rafael 3 Marin Organic Point Reyes Station 6 Marin Sanitary San Rafael 250

Marin Society of Artists Ross 100 Marin Theatre Company Mill Valley 25

Marin Transit San Rafael 10 Martin Sinai Rayman, DDS San Rafael 5

Masselli & Sons, Inc Petaluma 5 Mcc Building Maintenance Novato 15

Meridian Commercial San Rafael 8 Mike's Bikes San Rafael 100

Minto & Wilkie Inc San Rafael 35 Mona Restaurant San Rafael 15

Monitise Americas San Rafael 115 Mullen and Flippi Santa Rosa 60

New Media Learning San Rafael 4 North Bay Law Group Mill Valley 2

North Marin Water District Novato 31 Novato Pediatric Dentistry Novato 7 Oliva Optical & Hearing San Rafael 3 One Circle Foundation San Rafael 4

Parisi Consulting Sausalito 6 Parnell Pharmaceuticals San Rafael 45

Pensionalysis Incorporated San Anselmo 6 Permar & Co San Anselmo 5 Perry's Deli San Rafael 11

Pet Emergency and Specialty Center San Rafael 400 Pizza Antica Mill Valley Mill Valley 60

Private Ocean San Rafael 20 Rab Motors San Rafael 106

Radiant Logic Novato 200 Raptor Pharmaceutical Corp Novato 13

Red Hill Pet Center San Rafael 8 Rel Corte Madera 40

Riley Street Art Supply San Rafael 6 Ring Mountain Day School Mill Valley 19 Robert Greene Real Estate San Rafael 5 Robert Hess & Company Tiburon 10

Ron Andrews Medical Co Inc San Rafael


39

Ross Valley Pharmacy San Rafael 5 Royce Printing Mill Valley 15

Ryvin Wallace Law Group Mill Valley 2 Samuel Hubbard Mill Valey 5

San Marin Dentistry Novato 11 Scandinavian Designs San Rafael 20

SFSU Romberg Tiburon Ctr for Environmental Studies Tiburon 50 Shahin Rug Gallery San Rafael 2

Smith Ranch Homes Homeowners Association San Rafael 85 Sonnen Motorcars San Rafael 112

Spaulding McCullough & Tansil Santa Rosa 36 Spiral Water Technologies, Inc. San Rafael 3

StaVin Inc Sausalito 31 Stens Corporation San Rafael 4

Stephan-Hill Jewelry Designers San Rafael 5 Stephen Delahunty Novato 3

Stepping Stones Project Fairfax 30 Sunspeed Enterprises Point Reyes Station 2 Sutter Instrument Co Novato 70

Tamalapais Pet Hospital Mill Valley 14 Tamalpais Union High School District Larkspur 10

Telltake Games San Rafael 300 The City of Belvedere Belvedere 20 The Lighthouse Café Sausalito 9

The Marine Mammal Center Sausalito 44 The Salvation Army San Rafael 4

The Siloe Project San Anselmo 1 Town of Corte Madera Corte Madera 15

Town of Fairfax Fairfax 28 Town of Ross Ross 14

Town of San Anselmo San Anselmo 24 Town of Tiburon Tiburon 93

Township building Services Novato 400 Transportation Authority of Marin San Rafael 11

Turnstile Corte Madera 3 Twm Architects San Rafael 5

Univeral Protection Service Corte Madera 45 Vandament Accountancy Corporation Larkspur 5

Vionic Group San Rafael 70 Waagl Sausalito 4

Watersavers Irrigation San Rafael 30 Whisper Hearing Center San Rafael 18

Wilderness Trail Bikes, Inc. Mill Valley 20 Wind Harvest International Point Reyes Station 3

Woodruff Sawyer & CO Novato 70 WRA, Inc San Rafael 45

Zep Solar, Inc San Rafael 8


40


41

Marin Emergency Ride Home (ERH) Program, offered by the Transportation Authority of Marin, provides a free ride home in case of emergency for Marin County employees who use alternative transportation options, such as carpooling, vanpooling, public transit, bicycling, and walking.

HOW DOES THE PROGRAM WORK?1. Marin County based employers enroll in the program

by going online: www.marinerh.org

2. When an unexpected situation arises, (e.g., child is sick, bike got a

flat tire, carpool partner left early, need to work late), employees

who use commute alternatives can take an Emergency Ride Home.

Please see program rules at www.marinerh.org

3. The employee pays for the ride and later submits a ride claim form

along with a receipt to the ERH Program for reimbursement.

GUIDELINESAll rides must originate at worksites located in Marin County. The employee

can be dropped off at home, a transit stop, or the location of their parked

car (e.g., a park and ride lot, carpool partner’s home, etc). Emergency

related side trips on the way home are permitted, including picking up a

sick child, or stopping at an ATM for cash to pay for the ride.

Are there ride or dollar limits for reimbursement?

Each employee can be reimbursed for up to four ERH trips per year. No

single trip can exceed $125 and total reimbursement may not exceed

$500 per year.

Finding a ride home

The employee with the emergency calls a taxi, or equivalent (Uber/Lyft,

etc.) Neither the ERH Program nor the employer is responsible for providing

transportation.

ENROLL TODAY!Marin ERH is available to all Marin-based employers and their employees.

The employer can register directly at: www.marinerh.org

For more information call (415) 226-0853 or email: [email protected]

MARIN COMMUTE OPTIONSOur roads can only handle so much traffic, no matter how many

improvements we make. If we can modify our traveling habits,

even just once a week, we can help make the commute better for

everyone. Finding alternatives to driving solo to work helps improve

our community by decreasing traffic congestion and greenhouse

gas emissions.

Bicycling

Results in healthier employees and a lower carbon footprint.

Visit WalkBikeMarin.org for more information on bicycling

in Marin County.

Carpools

Offer a range of perks like discounts on bridge tolls,

access to HOV lanes, and shared gas/parking expenses.

To find a carpool, visit www.511.org

Vanpools

Offer $3600 for new vanpools with an origin or destination in

Marin County, CA. To register for a vanpool, visit www.511.org

Transit

Marin Transit, Golden Gate Transit, and soon SMART will offer

excellent travel options to/from/around Marin.

For More Transit Information

Marin Transit: www.marintransit.org

Golden Gate Transit: www.goldengatetransit.org

SMART: www.sonomamarintrain.org

415.226.0815 | www.tam.ca.gov

MARIN EMERGENCY RIDE HOMELeaving your car at home just got easier!

Bay Area Air uality Management District

Item 6e - Attachment B

42


43

GETTING AROUND MARIN: Transportation Options

Our roads can only handle so much traffic, no matter

how many improvements we make. If we can modify

our traveling habits, even just once a week, we can help

make the commute better for everyone. Finding alternatives

to driving solo to work helps improve our community by

decreasing both traffic congestion and greenhouse gas and

other toxic emissions.

TAKE A FREE RIDE HOME!marinerh.org

Leaving your car at home just got easier! The Transportation Authority of Marin’s Emergency Ride Home Program is available to all Marin employees whose employers register with the program. This program provides rides home to employees who use commute alternatives and need to get home quickly in the event of an unexpected situation (e.g. child is sick, need to work late, bike got a flat tire, carpool partner left early).

SHARE A RIDE 511.org

It’s smart to share your ride — and your expenses. You can cut your daily commuting costs by 50%, save wear-and-tear on your vehicle, reduce stress and greenhouse gas emissions.

• Carpool: 511.org provides options for ridematching throughout the Bay Area.

• Vanpool: New vanpools may be eligible for the Transportation Authority of Marin’s $3,600 cash incentive. Visit www.511.org to find vanpools and apply for the incentive. Vanpooling may also qualify commuters for IRS incentives and available regional incentives.

TAKE THE FERRYgoldengateferry.org

Golden Gate Ferry operates ferry services from Larkspur and Sausalito to / from San Francisco. This is one of the most unique and beautiful commutes in the Bay Area!

TAKE THE BUSmarin transit .org | goldengatetransit.org

By taking the bus with Marin Transit and Golden Gate Transit you save money on gas, parking and car maintenance — and driving stress. Discounts are available for

youth, disabled riders and those aged 65+.

Park & Ride lots in Marin County allow you to park your car for free and complete your commute by bus or carpool. Buses are equipped with bike racks, so you can also combine biking and riding. Visit www.goldengatetransit.org/services/parkride.php

CATCH THE SMART TRAINsonomamarintrain.org

Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART) is a commuter train service along the 101 corridor. The initial segment is from Santa Rosa to Downtown San Rafael.

WALK & BIKEwalkbikemarin.org

www.walkbikemarin.org

Walk Bike Marin’s site has useful information for someone getting started biking or walking to work. Visit www.walkbikemarin.org. Also check out the Marin County Bicycle Coalition, marinbike.org for bicycle route information, policies and maps.

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOLSsaferoutestoschools.org

Safe Routes to Schools (SR2S) is a program of the Transportation Authority of Marin designed to reduce local congestion around schools by increasing the number of children walking and biking to school. A SR2S program integrates health, fitness, traffic relief, environmental

awareness and safety under one program. It is an opportunity for parents to work closely with their children’s school, the community and the local Marin government to create a healthy lifestyle for children and a safer and cleaner environment for everyone. The program is offered to all schools in Marin County, California.

415.226.0815 | www.tam.ca.gov

Item 6e - Attachment C

44


David Chan, Programming and Legislation Manager SUBJECT: Adopt Positions on State Legislative Bills (Action), Agenda Item No. 7 RECOMMENDATION Recommend the TAM Board adopts positions on State Legislative bills as shown in Attachment A. BACKGROUND In January 2017, TAM adopted a Legislative Platform (Attachment B) in guiding policy decisions and communicating TAM’s goals to the Legislature and other agencies (including, but not limited to, MTC, Regional Transportation Planning Agencies, CSAC, League of California Cities, and SHCC) that have impacts on Marin and TAM during the year. TAM staff and/or Khouri Consulting will be recommending positions to be taken on pending legislation before the close of the 2017 State Legislation Session in August 2017, particularly those that are related to our adopted Legislative Platform. Letters of support or opposition may also be developed at the appropriate time and Mr. Khouri may be requested to testify at Legislative hearings, if warranted, to convey TAM’s positions on specific legislation. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS The 2017 legislative session is the first year of a two-year session. Bills introduced in the first year of a two-year session may be moved to the second year in 2018 if bills do not generate sufficient interest. Attachment A contains the initial set of 29 bills that are being monitored by staff and Mr. Khouri. Bills may be added to the chart in the coming months as they become relevant to TAM or Marin. TAM staff also adds bills that have been requested by TAM Board Commissioners for discussion or action. Of the 29 bills listed in the matrix, staff is recommending the following positions:

Position Total Bills Support 10 bills AB 1, AB 17, AB 28, AB 151, AB 1113, AB 1218, ACA 4,

SB 1, SCA 2, and SCA 6 Monitor 15 bills AB 65, AB 91, AB 174, AB 378, AB 398, AB 399, AB 467,

AB 496, AB 1121, AB 1282, AB 1324, AB 1613, SB 145, SB 672, and SB 760,

45

TAM Board Meeting, Item 7 Page 2 of 2 March 23, 2017

Oppose 2 bills AB 1640 and SB 423 No position 2 bills AB 87 and AB 694

Mr. Khouri will be attending the TAM Board to discuss the bills in greater detail, particularly with AB 1 and SB 1. Staff recommends positions on individual bills, based on the adopted Legislative Platform, staff’s assessments in consultation with Mr. Khouri, and positions previously adopted by the TAM Board in the past on those particular topics. Staff also considers what partner agencies positions are and what role taking a position at all may play in the outcome. These initial recommended positions will be revised to reflect the TAM Board’s recommendations once they have been deliberated. Attachment C is MTC’s estimated revenues for Marin from AB 1 and SB 1. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE The Finance and Policy Executive Committee convened on March 13, 2017 to review 37 bills and the recommended positions before unanimously supporting the recommendations as shown in Attachment A. Several bills were removed from the list because they considered “dead on arrival,” ambiguous Spot bills, or already covered under AB 1 and SB 1. ATTACHMENT Attachment A – 2017 State Legislative Bills Attachment B – Adopted 2017 Legislative Platform Attachment C – MTC’s Estimated Revenues for Marin from AB 1 and SB 1

46

Attachment A

Page 1 of 9

Preliminary Bill Matrix – March 2017

Measure Status Bill Summary Suggested Position

AB 1 Frazier (D) Transportation Funding

12/5/16 Introduced

This bill proposes a $6 billion funding package, through a variation of gas and diesel taxes increases, Cap and trade revenues, restoring commercial truck weight fees, repaying outstanding loans, and other miscellaneous fees to repair and maintain our state and local roads, improve our trade corridors, and support public transit and active transportation. The b re a k rehabilitation of the state highway system; $2.4 billion for maintenance and rehabilitation of local streets and roads; $577 million for the State Transportation improvement Program, which provides funding for regions; $563 million for public transportation capital and operations funding; $600 million for freight goods movement; and up to $150 million for active transportation. Additional reforms such as a provision for lowering the vote threshold for local sales tax measures from 2/3 to 55%, permanently extending the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) exemption for projects within an existing right of way, permanently expanding the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) delegation for Caltrans, and creating an advanced mitigation program to expedite project delivery are also included. A constitutional amendment to protect against diversion of funding for non-transportation purposes is also contained.

Support

AB 17 Holden (D) Transit Pass Program

1/19/17 Assembly Transportation Committee

Create the Transit Pass Program to be administered by Caltrans. The would bill require the Controller of the State of California to allocate moneys made available for the program, upon appropriation by the Legislature , to support transit pass programs that provide free or reduced-fare transit passes to specified pupils and students.

Support

AB 28 Frazier (D) NEPA Delegation

3/1/17 Senate Appropriations Committee Set for Hearing on 3/6/17

Existing federal law requires the United States Secretary of Transportation to carry out a surface transportation project delivery pilot program, under which the participating states assume certain responsibilities for environmental review and clearance of transportation projects that would otherwise be the responsibility of the federal government. Until January 1, 2017, existing law provides that the State of California, through Caltrans, consents to the jurisdiction of the federal courts with regard to the compliance, discharge, or enforcement of the responsibilities it assumed as a participant in the pilot program.

This bill would remove the sunset date allowing for California to participate in the program three additional years. The bill contains an urgency clause.

Support

AB 65 Patterson (R) High-Speed Rail Bond Debt Service

1/19/17

Assembly Transportation Committee

Existing law provides for transfer of certain vehicle weight fee revenues to the Transportation Debt Service Fund to reimburse the General Fund for payment of current year debt service on general obligation bonds issued for transportation purposes, including bonds issued for high-speed rail and associated purposes pursuant to the Safe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century (Proposition 1A of 2008).

This bill would specifically exclude from payment under these provisions the debt service for Proposition 1A bonds.

Monitor

Item 7 - Attachment A

47

Attachment A

Page 2 of 9



AB 87 Ting (D)

Autonomous Vehicles

1/19/17


Existing law requires the DMV to adopt regulations no later than January 1, 2015, setting forth requirements for the submission of evidence of insurance, surety bond, or self-insurance, and for the submission and approval of an application to operate an autonomous vehicle. Under current law, it is unlawful and constitutes an infraction for any person to violate, or fail to comply with any provision of the Vehicle Code, unless otherwise specified.

This bill would provide that violation of this section is not an infraction and would instead, among other things, require the department to revoke the registration of a vehicle that is being operated in violation of those provisions.

AB 91 Cervantes (D)

HOV Lanes

1/19/17


Existing law authorizes the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to designate certain lanes for the exclusive or preferential use of high-occupancy vehicles (HOV). When those exclusive or preferential use lanes are established and double parallel solid lines are in place to the right thereof, existing law prohibits any person driving a vehicle from crossing over those double lines to enter into or exit from the lanes, and entrance or exit from those lanes is authorized only in areas designated for these purposes or where a single broken line is in place to the right of the lanes, except as specified.

This bill would prohibit, commencing July 1, 2018, a HOV lane from being established in the County of Riverside, unless that lane is established as a HOV lane only during the hours of heavy commuter traffic, as determined by Caltrans. The bill would require any existing HOV lane in the County of Riverside that is not a toll lane to be modified to operate as a HOV lane under those same conditions. The bill would authorize Caltrans, on or after May 1, 2019, to reinstate 24-hour HOV lanes in the County of Riverside if Caltrans makes a specified determination, and would require Caltrans to report to the Legislature on the impact on traffic of limiting the use of HOV lanes only during the hours of heavy commuter traffic, as provided in the bill.

Monitor

AB 151 Burke (D)

Cap and Trade Program Extension

1/11/17

Introduced

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates the State Air Resources Board as the state agency charged with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The state board is required to approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions level in 1990 to be achieved by 2020 and to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the 1990 level by 2030. The act authorizes the state board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms and to adopt a regulation that establishes a system of market-based declining annual aggregate emissions limits for sources or categories of sources that emit greenhouse gases, applicable from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2020, inclusive, as specified.

This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation that authorizes the state board to utilize a market-based compliance mechanism after December 31, 2020, in furtherance of the statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit of at least 40% below the 1990 level by 2030.

Support


48

Attachment A

Page 3 of 9



AB 174 Bigelow (R) California Transportation Commission Membership

1/30/17


Existing law provides that the CTC consists of 13 members, 11 voting members, of which 9 are appointed by the Governor, subject to Senate confirmation, one is appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules, 1 is appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly, and 2 Members of the Legislature who are appointed as nonvoting ex officio members.

This bill would require that at least one voting member reside in a rural county with a population of less than 100,000 individuals.

Monitor

AB 378 Garcia (D) California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006: regulations.

2/9/17 Introduced

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 designates CARB with monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The act authorizes the state board to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms. The act requires the state board to approve a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions level in 1990 to be achieved by 2020 and to ensure that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the 1990 level by 2030. This bill would additionally require CARB to consider and account for the social costs of the emissions and greenhouse gases when adopting those rules and regulations. The bill would also authorize CARB to adopt or subsequently revise new regulations that establish a market-based compliance mechanism, applicable from January 1, 2021, to December 31, 2030, to complement direct emissions reduction measures in ensuring that statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to at least 40% below the 1990 level by 2030.

Monitor

AB 398 Garcia (D) Greenhouse Gas reduction Fund: reporting

2/9/17 Introduced

The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 establishes CARB as the state agency responsible for monitoring and regulating sources of emissions of greenhouse gases. The act authorizes the CARB to include the use of market-based compliance mechanisms. Existing law requires all moneys, except for fines and penalties, collected by CARB from a market-based compliance mechanism to be deposited in the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (GGRF) and to be available upon appropriation by the Legislature. Existing law requires the Department of Finance (DOF) to annually submit a report to the appropriate committees of the Legislature on the status of the projects funded with moneys from the fund. This bill would require DOF to include additional information in its annual report to the Legislature, including, among other things, the greenhouse gas emissions reductions attributable to each project and the geographic location, industry sector, and number of employees of the business entities, as defined, receiving moneys from the fund. The bill would require state agencies expending moneys from the fund to condition the acceptance of those moneys on the recipient providing information necessary to meet the reporting requirements.

Monitor


49

Attachment A

Page 4 of 9



AB 399 Grayson (D) Autonomous Vehicles

2/9/17 Introduced

Existing law defines an autonomous vehicle as any vehicle equipped with autonomous technology that has been integrated into the vehicle. Existing law authorizes a driver to operate an autonomous vehicle on public roads for testing purposes if specified requirements are met. Existing law authorizes the Department of Motor Vehicles to establish additional requirements if, in consultation with the Department of the California Highway Patrol, the department determines that they are necessary to ensure the safe operation of autonomous vehicles on public roads. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation relating to autonomous vehicles and the balance of innovation with the State of California’s safety regulations.

Monitor

AB 467 Mullin (D) Local transportation authorities: transactions and use taxes

2/13/17 Introduced

The Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act provides for the creation in any county of a local transportation authority and authorizes the imposition by the authority, by ordinance, of a retail transactions and use tax, subject to approval of the ordinance by 2/3 of the voters. Existing law provides for the authority to adopt a transportation expenditure plan for the proceeds of the tax, and requires the entire adopted transportation expenditure plan to be included in the voter information handbook sent to voters. This bill would exempt an authority from including the entire adopted transportation expenditure plan in the voter information handbook if the authority posts the plan on its Internet Web site, and the sample ballot and the voter information handbook sent to voters include information on viewing an electronic version of the plan on the Internet Web site and for obtaining a printed copy of the plan by calling the county election office. The bill would require the authority to provide sufficient copies of the plan to the county election office for mailing to each person requesting a copy. By imposing additional requirements on county election officials, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Monitor

AB 496 Fong (R) Transportation Funding

2/13/17 Introduced

This bill creates The Traffic Relief and Road Improvement Act, which provides $7.8 billion ($5.6 billion multi-year/$2.2 billion one-time revenues) for transportation (highways-including maintenance and new capacity, local streets and roads, public transportation, and active transportation), by restoring funds, such as commercial truck weight fees, and utilizing a variety of Cap and Trade funds and existing taxes, such as the sales tax generated from vehicles sales, diesel sales tax, and insurance payments, among other sources. The bill also proposes reforms to the California Environmental Quality Act, creates the Office of the Transportation Inspector General, makes the California Transportation Commission an independent body, and additional oversight for Caltrans.

Monitor


50

Attachment A

Page 5 of 9



AB 694 Ting (D) Bicycles

2/15/17 Introduced

Existing law requires any person operating a bicycle under specified conditions to ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway, except under specified conditions, including, among other things, when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that make it unsafe or when approaching a place where a right turn is authorized. This bill would recast those provisions to instead require a person operating a bicycle to ride in the right-hand lane or bicycle lane, if one is present, and would additionally require a person operating a bicycle in a lane that is wide enough for a vehicle and bicycle to travel safely side by side within the lane to ride far enough to the right in order to allow vehicles to pass, except when it is reasonably necessary to avoid conditions that make it hazardous to continue along the right-hand edge of the lane, and when approaching a place where a right turn is authorized. By redefining the elements of a crime, this bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

AB 1113 Bloom (D) State Transit Assistance Program

2/16/17 Introduced

The bill would provide that only State Transit Assistance (STA)-eligible operators, as defined, are eligible to receive an allocation from the portion of program funds based on transit operator revenues. The bill would provide for each STA-eligible operator within the jurisdiction of the allocating local transportation agency to receive a proportional share of the revenue-based program funds based on the qualifying revenues of that operator, as defined. The bill would revise the duties of the Controller and Caltrans in administering the program. The bill would make various other conforming changes and would delete obsolete provisions. Marin Transit supports AB 1113.

Support

AB 1121 Chiu (D) San Francisco Bay Area ferries

2/17/17 Introduced

Existing law establishes the San Francisco Bay Area Water Emergency Transportation Authority with specified powers and duties, including, but not limited to, the authority to coordinate the emergency activities of all water transportation and related facilities within the San Francisco Bay Area region, as defined. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature to enact legislation to authorize San Francisco Bay Area voters to approve new, dedicated funding for San Francisco Bay Area ferries.

Monitor


51

Attachment A

Page 6 of 9



AB 1218 Obernolte CEQA Exemptions: bicycle transportation plans

2/17/17 Introduced

The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of, an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. CEQA, until January 1, 2018, exempts from its requirements bicycle transportation plans for an urbanized area for restriping of streets and highways, bicycle parking and storage, signal timing to improve street and highway intersection operations, and related signage for bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles under certain conditions. CEQA, until January 1, 2018, also exempts from its requirements projects consisting of restriping of streets and highways for bicycle lanes in an urbanized area that are consistent with a bicycle transportation plan under certain conditions. This bill would extend indefinitely those 2 exemptions.

Support

AB 1282 Mullin (D) Permitting task force

2/17/17 Introduced

This bill would establish a transportation permitting task force consisting of representatives from Caltrans, the California Transportation Commission, state environmental permitting agencies, and other transportation planning entities to develop a process for early engagement for all parties in the development of transportation projects.

Monitor

AB 1324 Gloria (D) MPO: transactions and use taxes

2/17/17 Introduced

This bill would authorize a metropolitan planning organization authorized by law to levy, expand, increase, or extend a transactions and use tax to levy, expand, increase, or extend that tax in only a portion of the jurisdiction, as an alternative to the entire jurisdiction, in which the organization is authorized to levy, expand, increase, or extend the tax, if approved by the required percentage of the voters in that portion of the jurisdiction. The bill would require the revenues derived from the levy, expansion, increase, or extension to be used only within the area for which the levy, expansion, increase, or extension was approved by the voters.

Monitor

AB 1613 Mullin San Mateo County Transit District: retail transactions and use tax

2/17/17 Introduced

Existing law authorizes the board of the San Mateo County Transit District to adopt a retail transactions and use tax ordinance in accordance with specified provisions of law, including a requirement that the combined rate of all such taxes that may be imposed in the county not exceed 2%. This bill would authorize the board to exceed that 2% limit to impose a retail transactions and use tax set at a rate of no more than 0.5%, if approved by the board before January 1, 2021.

Monitor


52

Attachment A

Page 7 of 9



AB 1640 Garcia (D) Transportation funding: low-income communities

2/17/17 Introduced

This bill would require, beginning January 1, 2020, each regional transportation improvement program to allocate a minimum of 25% of available funds to projects or programs that provide direct, meaningful, and assured benefits to low-income individuals who live in certain identified communities or to riders of transit service that connects low-income residents to critical amenities and services. The bill would require Caltrans, in consultation with residents of low-income communities and specified state agencies, to adopt guidelines for this allocation no later than January 1, 2018, to define and map low-income communities that are disadvantaged with respect to transportation, to identify communities that would benefit from the allocation requirements, and to specify criteria for determining whether certain investments benefit low-income residents of the identified communities. The bill would require the department to provide financial support, upon appropriation by the Legislature, to low-income residents of low-income communities for specified purposes generally relating to enabling their participation in the development of these guidelines and the selection of transportation projects and programs.

Oppose

ACA 4 Aguiar-Cury (D) Voter Approval: 55% Vote Threshold

2/17/17 Introduced

Lowers vote threshold to 55% for affordable housing and infrastructure measures. Support

SB 1 Beall (D) Transportation Funding

2/17/17 Senate Environmental Quality Committee

Nearly identical to AB 1 (Frazier) with some exceptions such as SB1 phasing in the 12 cent increase over three years, proposing a percentage of truck weight fees being returned while AB1 specifies an amount (SB 1 caps weight fee transfer at 50% in FY 2020-21, while AB 1 caps transfer at $500 million) (being more prescriptive on trade corridor funding, containing a dedicated pot of funding for commuter and intercity rail (.5%, of sales tax which would generate $40 million annually, and the discrepancy on the zero-emission vehicle fee ($100 vs. $165 in AB 1), among other things. Last amended on 1/26/17

Support

SB 145 Hill Autonomous Vehicles: testing on public roads

1/17/17 Introduced

Current law requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to notify the Legislature if it receives an application from a manufacturer seeking approval to operate an autonomous vehicle capable of operating without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle. Current law prohibits such an application from becoming effective any sooner than 180 days after that application is submitted. This bill would repeal the requirement that the DMV notify the Legislature of receipt of an application seeking approval to operate an autonomous vehicle capable of operating without the presence of a driver inside the vehicle.

Monitor


53

Attachment A

Page 8 of 9



SB 423 Cannella Indemnity

2/15/17 Introduced

Existing law provides, for all contracts, and amendments to contracts, entered into on or after January 1, 2007, with a public agency for design professional services, all provisions, clauses, covenants, and agreements contained in, collateral to, or affecting these contracts, that purport to indemnify, including the cost to defend, the public agency by a design professional against liability for claims against the public agency, are unenforceable, except for claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional. Existing law provides, with respect to contracts and amendments to contracts entered into on or after January 1, 2011, with a public agency for design professional services, that all provisions, clauses, covenants, and agreements contained in, collateral to, or affecting these contracts or amendments to contracts that purport to require the design professional to defend the public agency under an indemnity agreement, including the duty and the cost to defend, are unenforceable, except for claims that arise out of, pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of the design professional. Existing law provides that all contracts and all solicitation documents between a public agency and a design professional are deemed to incorporate these provisions by reference. This bill would make a non-substantive change to these provisions. It is a reintroduction of SB 885, a bill from the 2015-16 Session, which TAM opposed.

Oppose

SB 672 Fuller Traffic-actuated signals: motorcycles and bicycles

2/17/17 Introduced

Existing law, until January 1, 2018, includes among traffic control devices, a traffic-actuated signal that displays one or more of its indications in response to the presence of traffic by mechanical, visual, electrical, or other means, and requires, upon the first placement of a traffic-actuated signal or replacement of the loop detector of a traffic-actuated signal, that the signal be installed and maintained, to the extent feasible and in conformance with professional engineering practices, so as to detect lawful bicycle or motorcycle traffic on the roadway. This bill would extend the operation of this requirement indefinitely.

Monitor

SB 760 Wiener Transportation funding: active transportation: complete streets

2/17/17 Introduced

This bill would establish a Division of Active Transportation within Caltrans and require that an undersecretary of the Transportation Agency be assigned to give attention to active transportation program (ATP) matters to guide progress toward meeting Caltrans’ ATP goals and objectives. The bill would require the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to give high priority to increasing safety for pedestrians and bicyclists and to the implementation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities. The bill would require, on or before January 1, 2018, Caltrans to update the Highway Design Manual to incorporate the “complete streets” design concept, including, but not limited to, a specified guidance for selection of bicycle facilities. This bill would require the asset management plan to prescribe a process for community input and complete streets implementation to prioritize safety and accessibility for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit users on all SHOPP projects, as specified.

Monitor


54

Attachment A

Page 9 of 9



SCA 2 Newman (D) Motor Vehicle Fee and Taxes: Restrictions on Expenditures

1/18/17 Introduced

Subject to voter approval, this measure would prohibit the Legislature from borrowing revenues from fees and taxes imposed by the state on vehicles or their use or operation, and from using those revenues other than as specifically permitted by Article XIX. The measure would also prohibit those vehicle revenues and fuel tax revenues from being pledged or used for the payment of principal and interest on general obligation bonds issued by the state, except that vehicle weight fee revenues would be authorized to be pledged or used for the payment of principal and interest on general obligation transportation bonds approved prior to January 1, 2017.

Support

SCA 6 Wiener (D) Local transportation measures: special taxes: voter approval

2/17/17 Introduced

The California Constitution conditions the imposition of a special tax by a city, county, or special district upon the approval of 2/3 of the voters of the city, county, or special district voting on that tax, except that certain school entities may levy an ad valorem property tax for specified purposes with the approval of 55% of the voters within the jurisdiction of these entities. This measure would require that the imposition, extension, or increase of a special tax by a local government for the purpose of providing funding for transportation purposes, as specified, be submitted to the electorate and approved by 55% of the voters voting on the proposition. The measure would also make conforming and technical, non-substantive changes.

Support


55


56

Attachment B

2017 Legislative Platform (Adopted January 2017)

Issue Goal Impacts/Opportunities A. Transportation Funding

1. In March 2010, the legislature approved the “gas tax swap” package, which increased the excise tax and eliminated the sales tax on gasoline, in order to acquire General Fund relief to pay down bond debt service while maintaining traditional levels of funding for transportation programs. Traditional gas tax revenues however, which have not been adjusted since 1994, have failed to provide adequate, sustainable funding to address transportation needs. As a result, Proposition 1B served as the only supplemental source of funding to the gas tax. Now that the General Fund has been stabilized, and Proposition1B funding has matured, statewide stakeholders are pursuing an increase in existing revenues or an alternative funding mechanism in 2017 to supplement transportation infrastructure, including revenues dedicated to highways, local streets and roads, public transit, bicycle and pedestrian programs. The Governor, through his proposed FY 2017-18 State Budget, and legislature has proposed funding packages (the Governor’s plan is $4.2 billion, Assembly and Senate packages are $6 billion).Options for TAM include: • Pursuing funding for “Fix It First” projects, with an emphasis on local

streets and roads, transit capital, bicycle and pedestrian programs, and funding for local maintenance and operations to alleviate traffic congestion.

• Seeking additional State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) funding, which provides local transportation planning agencies with flexible funding to leverage federal grants and local sales tax dollars to address safety, congestion management, transit expansion and bicycle and pedestrian projects.

• Supporting the continuation of the Cap and Trade Program, which is set

• State Highway Account • Public Transportation Account • Highway Users Tax Account • Transportation Development Act • Cap and Trade Program • Active Transportation Program

Item 7 - Attachment B

57

Page 2 of 5

to expire in 2020. Funding from this program provides much needed resources to address public transportation, affordable housing, and bicycle and pedestrian needs. This includes seeking additional revenue from the 40% of non-continuously appropriated funds, meaning that the legislature has discretion on an annual basis to increase the amount of funding provided to programs such as the Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) and Transit Capital and Intercity Rail Funding Program (TCIRP).

• Supporting efforts to restore over $1.1 billion of annual truck weightfees for supporting the SHOPP, STIP or local streets and roadsprograms rather than paying for general obligation bond debt service.

• Repayment of $706 million to transportation for loans made to theGeneral Fund.

• Stabilization of the price-based portion of the gas tax. The volatility ofthis source resulted in $872 million reduction of revenues in 2015. Arestoration to FY 2013-14 levels would be preferred.

2. Due to the elimination of funding sources to the Public TransportationAccount (PTA) through the gas tax swap, the passage of Proposition 22and sole reliance on the sales tax on diesel may reduce revenue depositedinto the State Transit Assistance (STA). Support efforts to maximize thelevel of funding for the STA program, which provides transit operatorswith flexible funding that can be used for operations and capitalexpenditures. This includes supplementing and stabilizing the sales tax ondiesel, the sole source of funding for the program, in order to providepredictable, increased revenue to meet demand and accurately account forrolling stock and operational needs.

• Marin Transit• GGBHTD

3. The unreliability of the state funding has had a debilitating impact onfunding priority transportation projects in the County of Marin. TAMsupports legislation that allows for the approval for regional and localfunding for transportation. This includes the following:• Supporting efforts to increase funding for transportation projects, such

as lowering the vote threshold for local transportation measures to 55%without a requirement to pay for maintenance costs on state highwaysystem;

• Local Sales Taxes• Regional Gas Taxes• Local Vehicle Registration Fees


58

Page 3 of 5

• Sponsor legislation, after further local input, to provide an exemption-from the 2% cap for local sales tax measures to ensure that TAM, as well as each city within the county has the capacity to collect and benefit from the imposition of a new sales tax, while maintaining headroom for other city or county specific priorities;

• Support legislation sponsored by MTC seeking authority for Bay Area voters to consider at a future election on whether to raise tolls on state-owned bridges to fund congestion relief, rail connectivity and improved mobility in bridge corridors (Regional Measure 3).

• Support the enactment of legislation authorized in 1998 allowing MTC to enact up to a 10-cent regional gas tax for transportation, with emphasis on Local Streets and Roads Rehabilitation under Complete Streets policy.

4. The Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) program has been merged into the newly created Active Transportation Program (ATP). Support efforts to acquire funding from the ATP for items such as complete streets and other bicycle and pedestrian projects. Work with the California Transportation Commission and MTC to provide equitable geographic distribution of ATP funds.

• State-Funded ATP Projects • Regional-Funded ATP Projects

C. FY 2017-18 State Budget

1. Monitor, assess, and react to impacts anticipated from the FY 20167-18 State budget and anticipate shortfalls for transportation programs.

• Funding for dedicated projects such as MSN, STIP transit projects, and annual allocations for streets and roads

• Funding that matches Proposition 1B Programs, such as CMIA and SLPP

• Funding for transit operating (PTA/STA)

• Protection of SHA and STIP D. Air Quality 1. Monitor the results of the Roadway User Charge Committee’s Pilot

Program as it assesses the feasibility of implementing a mileage-based user fee as a supplemental or successor fee to the gas tax.

• Activities associated with SB 375 • Strategies to reduce VMT

2. Support funding for local and regional agency support to carry out SB 375 requirements by attempting to acquire funding from the various existing pots made available through the Cap and Trade programs.

• Activities associated with SB 375


59

Page 4 of 5

3. Coordinate with MTC and local jurisdictions with Marin to support projects that may qualify for funding under LCTOP and TCIRP within Governor’s Cap and Trade proposal to reduce GHG.

• Activities associated with SB 375

4. Support the highest possible level of sub-allocation of Cap and Trade funds to the regional and local levels to fund multimodal projects including local streets and roads, bicycle-pedestrian, transportation demand management (TDM), rail, and transit projects.

5. Support flexibility with the Cap and Trade funds allocated for transportation purposes for projects to meet GHG reduction targets and to implement sustainable communities strategies. This includes adjusting program guidelines to provide for flexibility to address a mutual benefit between disadvantaged communities and the region as a whole.

• Flexibilities with the use of New Transportation Funds

E. Alternative Modes 1. Support maintaining and enhancing the current levels of state and federal funding for bicycle/pedestrian and electric vehicle/infrastructure programs.

• Safe Routes to School Programs • TDA Article 3 Funds • Active Transportation Program (ATP)

Funds 2. Several legislators have historically introduced legislation to relax

requirements for using high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes. TAM opposes additional expansion of high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes to usage by other than high-occupancy vehicles and those vehicles currently allowed by law to use such lanes.

• Highway 101 HOV Lanes

F. Project Delivery 1. Seek opportunities to increase flexibility to deliver projects, such as supporting alternative contracting methods that include design-build and public private partnership.

• Future Major Capital projects

2. Oppose efforts to require local agencies to reimburse Caltrans for its costs related to the preparation and/or review of project initiation documents (PIDs) for locally sponsored projects on state highway system.

• All Locally Sponsored Projects on the State Highway System

3. Preserve the flexibility for local transportation agencies to be designated as the lead agency for CEQA actions, project development work and construction management for state highway projects. This includes supporting the streamlining of the CEQA process for projects within the existing right of way and advance project environmental mitigation to get early permit approval.

• Future Major Capital projects


60

Page 5 of 5

4. Support the removal of the sunset date for the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) delegated authority, given that Caltrans’ participation in the pilot program has enabled us to substantially streamline our environmental project review process under NEPA by removing a layer of review, while providing considerable savings - both in cost and time- in processing standard environmental documents.

•

5. Support the continuation of Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) bonds and AB 3090 arrangements by the CTC for STIP projects that are programmed in the out-years but are ready for implementation.

• All STIP-Funded Projects

6. Support efforts to allow regional transportation agency to utilize procurement methods that will expedite project delivery and reduce cost.

• STIP Projects

G. Federal Priorities 1. Collaborate with transportation stakeholders to advocate for the reauthorization of a federal Surface Transportation Programs to replace MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century). Support new revenue for the Highway Trust Fund and advocate for the highest possible level of funding at the county level.

• STP, CMAQ, and ATP Funds • Regional Programs such as Local

Streets and Roads (LSR), Lifeline, and Freeway Performance Initiative (FPI)

2. Support and enhance current flexibility in allowing dedication of funds locally to the most urgent needs and the meeting of statewide goals, such as those under AB32 and SB375.

• STP, CMAQ, and ATP Funds

3. Support dedicated funding for bicycle/pedestrian projects at the federal level.

• Bicycle/Pedestrian projects • Safe Routes to School projects

4. Support the permanent increase of pre-tax commuter benefits from the current amount of $130 per month to an equivalent amount allowed for pre-tax parking ($250) with cost of living adjustments (COLA).

• Local and Regional Commuter Benefits Programs


61


62

Apportionment Jurisdictions

AB 1/SB 1 Estimate from

Increase in Sales Tax on Diesel Fuel

AB 1/SB 1 Estimate from Increase in Cap

and Trade

Combined Annual Increased Funding

ACCMA - Corresponding to ACE 604,926 230,010 834,935 Caltrain 12,642,199 4,806,920 17,449,119 CCCTA (County Connection) 1,428,869 543,296 1,972,165 City of Dixon 11,086 4,215 15,301 ECCTA (Tri Delta Transit) 661,753 251,617 913,370 City of Fairfield 279,231 106,172 385,403 GGBHTD 11,190,879 4,255,087 15,445,966 City of Healdsburg 1,172 446 1,618 LAVTA 577,566 219,607 797,172 Marin Transit 2,084,320 792,517 2,876,838 NVTA 144,331 54,879 199,210 City of Petaluma 32,416 12,325 44,741 City of Rio Vista 2,549 969 3,519 SamTrans 7,774,857 2,956,219 10,731,076 City of Santa Rosa 317,344 120,663 438,007 Solano County Transit 651,916 247,877 899,793 Sonoma County Transit 343,600 130,646 474,246 City of Union City 97,709 37,152 134,861 VTA 29,913,230 11,373,852 41,287,082 VTA - Corresponding to ACE 647,578 246,227 893,805 WCCTA 748,827 284,725 1,033,552 WETA 3,075,992 1,169,579 4,245,571

SUBTOTAL 22,114,534 8,408,568 30,523,101 AC Transit 9,786,039 3,720,927 13,506,966 BART 22,483,137 8,548,721 31,031,858 SFMTA 40,963,174 15,575,351 56,538,525

SUBTOTAL 51,117,816 19,436,432 70,554,249

Bay Area Grand Total 73,232,350 27,845,000 101,077,350

Assumptions (3/3/17)

131,500,000

73,232,350

100,000,000

27,845,000

Transit operator shares are based on State Controller's FY 2014-15 STA Revenue Shares (same ones that apply in

Estimate of New Annual Transit Formula Funding in AB 1 and SB 1 for Bay Area

AB 1 & SB 1 both raise the sales tax on diesel fuel rate by 3.5%, estimated to generate $263 M by the LAO. Half of this is distributed by population; the other half using the revenue-based STA formula.

Bay Area Share of revenue-based STA funded by diesel sales tax increase:Estimate of Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) increase from Cap and Trade assumes $2 billion in annual revenue. Could be much lower depending on auction results.

Bay Area Share of revenue-based portion reflects 55.6% of 50% of LCTOP.

Item 7 - Attachment C

63

david

Typewritten Text

ATTACHMENT C

david

Typewritten Text

Estimate of New Bay Area STIP Funding from Restoration of 17.3 cents/gallon gas tax rate& Weight Fee Revenue

(Dollars in millions)

County Annual Increase Starting FY 2018

Five-Year Increase from Weight Fee Restoration

(FY 18-22)Alameda 15.6$ 23.1$ Contra Costa 9.9$ 14.7$ Marin 3.1$ 4.6$ Napa 1.8$ 2.7$ San Francisco 8.2$ 12.1$ San Mateo 8.3$ 12.4$ Santa Clara 18.3$ 27.1$ Solano 4.7$ 7.0$ Sonoma 5.7$ 8.5$

Region 75.7$ 112.20$

Assumptions: Under AB 1 and SB 1, Annual STIP Funding Increases $594 M per Year StatewideBoth bills would result in $1.3 billion in increased STIP revenue from FY 2018-2023 as a result of increased weight fees

Prepared by MTC Staff


64

Estimate of Bay Area Local Road Funding from SB 1 (Beall)

(Dollars in millions)

COUNTY TOTALS (includes city and county portions)

Estimate of Current FY 2018 State Funding

from Gas Tax Subventions

Estimated Increase from SB 1 (FY 2018)

Alameda 52 79$ Contra Costa 37 56$ Marin 8 13$ Napa 5 8$ San Francisco 25 39$ San Mateo 26 40$ Santa Clara 64 97$ Solano 15 23$ Sonoma 17 26$ Regional Total 250$ 382$ STATE TOTAL 1,276 2,068$

Note: Totals do not sum due to rounding

Prepared by MTC Staff


65

Estimate of Bay Area City and County Funding from SB 1 (Beall)

County/City Estimate of FY

2016-17 FundingProposed Funding

IncreaseALAMEDA ALAMEDA 1,504,098$ 2,291,396$ ALBANY 369,740$ 563,568$ BERKELEY 2,325,880$ 3,545,176$ DUBLIN 1,098,619$ 1,674,549$ EMERYVILLE 213,183$ 324,939$ FREMONT 4,423,329$ 6,742,173$ HAYWARD 2,989,712$ 4,557,011$ LIVERMORE 1,685,324$ 2,568,821$ NEWARK 870,643$ 1,327,061$ OAKLAND 8,005,367$ 12,202,025$ PIEDMONT 223,751$ 341,047$ PLEASANTON 1,468,516$ 2,238,357$ SAN LEANDRO 1,733,025$ 2,641,530$ UNION CITY 1,427,528$ 2,175,882$ City Total 28,337,930$ 43,193,535$ County Total 23,655,413$ 36,056,300$ Grand Total 51,993,343$ 79,249,835$

CONTRA COSTAANTIOCH 2,121,877$ 3,234,230$ BRENTWOOD 1,111,250$ 1,693,800$ CLAYTON 227,156$ 346,239$ CONCORD 2,467,739$ 3,761,403$ DANVILLE 860,659$ 1,311,843$ EL CERRITO 482,079$ 734,800$ HERCULES 491,557$ 749,245$ LAFAYETTE 498,933$ 760,489$ MARTINEZ 737,912$ 1,124,748$ MORAGA 328,889$ 501,302$ OAKLEY 765,256$ 1,166,427$ ORINDA 370,655$ 564,964$ PINOLE 377,155$ 574,872$ PITTSBURG 1,327,961$ 2,024,118$ PLEASANT HILL 675,205$ 1,029,168$ RICHMOND 2,103,350$ 3,205,990$ SAN PABLO 588,950$ 897,695$ SAN RAMON 1,540,739$ 2,348,441$ WALNUT CREEK 1,313,169$ 2,001,572$ City Total 18,390,491$ 28,031,346$ County Total 18,122,496$ 27,622,860$ Grand Total 36,512,987$ 55,654,206$

Assumes $2 billion statewide (250% Increase)


66

MARINBELVEDERE 46,832$ 71,383$ CORTE MADERA 191,226$ 291,473$ FAIRFAX 155,084$ 236,384$ LARKSPUR 247,767$ 377,655$ MILL VALLEY 288,481$ 439,712$ NOVATO 1,054,459$ 1,607,239$ ROSS 54,073$ 82,420$ SAN ANSELMO 254,053$ 387,236$ SAN RAFAEL 1,164,206$ 1,774,518$ SAUSALITO 148,584$ 226,476$ TIBURON 185,563$ 282,840$ City Total 3,790,330$ 5,777,336$ County Total 4,689,540$ 7,147,940$ Grand Total 8,479,870$ 12,925,276$

NAPA AMERICAN CANYON 401,526$ 612,018$ CALISTOGA 108,901$ 165,991$ NAPA 1,548,719$ 2,360,604$ ST HELENA 124,549$ 189,841$ YOUNTVILLE 64,270$ 97,963$ City Total 2,247,965$ 3,426,416$ County Total 3,068,597$ 4,677,249$ Grand Total 5,316,562$ 8,103,665$

SAN FRANCISCOCity Total 16,480,936$ 25,120,745$ County Total 8,989,540$ 13,702,131$ Grand Total 25,470,477$ 38,822,876$

SAN MATEO ATHERTON 141,480$ 215,648$ BELMONT 530,914$ 809,235$ BRISBANE 93,931$ 143,172$ BURLINGAME 592,063$ 902,441$ COLMA 40,429$ 61,624$ DALY CITY 2,073,456$ 3,160,424$ EAST PALO ALTO 577,408$ 880,103$ FOSTER CITY 640,719$ 976,603$ HALF MOON BAY 241,049$ 367,414$ HILLSBOROUGH 229,725$ 350,154$ MENLO PARK 657,903$ 1,002,796$ MILLBRAE 455,027$ 693,566$ PACIFICA 760,625$ 1,159,367$ PORTOLA VALLEY 93,659$ 142,758$ REDWOOD CITY 1,604,516$ 2,445,653$ SAN BRUNO 874,633$ 1,333,142$ SAN CARLOS 583,480$ 889,359$ SAN MATEO 1,988,192$ 3,030,463$ SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 1,300,032$ 1,981,549$ WOODSIDE 114,311$ 174,237$ City Total 13,593,553$ 20,719,707$ County Total 12,852,053$ 19,589,491$ Grand Total 26,445,606$ 40,309,198$


67

SANTA CLARA CAMPBELL 824,966$ 1,257,438$ CUPERTINO 1,174,755$ 1,790,597$ GILROY 1,043,268$ 1,590,181$ LOS ALTOS 594,904$ 906,771$ LOS ALTOS HILLS 168,845$ 257,358$ LOS GATOS 604,032$ 920,684$ MILPITAS 1,424,842$ 2,171,788$ MONTE SERENO 72,717$ 110,838$ MORGAN HILL 823,448$ 1,255,125$ MOUNTAIN VIEW 1,528,147$ 2,329,248$ PALO ALTO 1,314,415$ 2,003,471$ SAN JOSE 19,806,562$ 30,189,764$ SANTA CLARA 2,368,559$ 3,610,230$ SARATOGA 609,754$ 929,406$ SUNNYVALE 2,895,107$ 4,412,810$ City Total 35,254,321$ 53,735,709$ County Total 28,353,947$ 43,217,949$ Grand Total 63,608,268$ 96,953,657$

SOLANOBENICIA 549,227$ 837,148$ DIXON 381,281$ 581,161$ FAIRFIELD 2,191,805$ 3,340,815$ RIO VISTA 165,964$ 252,968$ SUISUN CITY 572,562$ 872,716$ VACAVILLE 1,854,877$ 2,827,259$ VALLEJO 2,343,453$ 3,571,963$ City Total 8,059,169$ 12,284,031$ County Total 7,226,249$ 11,014,468$ Grand Total 15,285,418$ 23,298,499$

SONOMA CLOVERDALE 175,987$ 268,244$ COTATI 149,479$ 227,841$ HEALDSBURG 234,922$ 358,075$ PETALUMA 1,170,550$ 1,784,189$ ROHNERT PARK 809,786$ 1,234,300$ SANTA ROSA 3,382,496$ 5,155,704$ SEBASTOPOL 152,613$ 232,617$ SONOMA 220,248$ 335,709$ WINDSOR 542,338$ 826,647$ City Total 6,838,418$ 10,423,325$ County Total 10,522,307$ 16,038,421$ Grand Total 17,360,725$ 26,461,746$

REGIONCity Total 132,993,112$ 202,712,150$ County Total 117,480,143$ 179,066,809$ Grand Total 250,473,255$ 381,778,959$


68


Derek McGill, Planning Manager Nick Nguyen, Project Delivery Manager

SUBJECT: Regional Measure 3 - Project Candidate List (Action), Agenda Item No. 8 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the TAM Board consider adopting Tier One candidates for consideration by MTC to be included in the Regional Measure 3 proposal. Staff recommend Tier Two candidates be adopted as well. Finally, staff recommends a pool of candidates to be brought forward “if the opportunity arises”. The candidate pools are described as follows: Tier One: • Bettini Transit Center Permanent Relocation - $25M • US 101/I-580 Direct Connector Project– $135M (existing footprint Curve Connector) - $255M (Hillside

Connector) • US 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows Carpool Lane and Multi-Use path system - $42M - $75 M (bridges all

rebuilt) • State Route 37 Multi-Modal Corridor Project – $20M (amongst 4 counties)

Tier Two: • Highway Interchange Improvements • Highway 101 Transit Capital Elements (Transit Access, Bus On Shoulder and Park and Ride

Improvements) • Bike and Pedestrian Program of Projects • Marin Transit Local O&M Facility Opportunity Candidates: • Bike and Pedestrian Candidates (same group as above) • Local and Regional Transit rehab needs • Local Streets and Roads rehab needs BACKGROUND This item was heard at both Executive Committees on Monday March 13th, 2017. Both Committees recommended a tiered approach in submittal of candidates to MTC. Comments from these Committees are included in the discussion section below. At the January and February TAM Board of Commissioners meetings, TAM staff brought forward to the TAM Board projects for TAM to consider submitting to MTC as Regional Measure 3 candidates. Each

69

TAM Board Item 8 Page 2 of 5 March 23, 2017

County Congestion Management Agency is developing candidate submittals for MTC to consider. In January, TAM heard brief presentations on the following candidates: • The Bettini Transit Center Permanent Facility – this transit facility is the largest transit facility in

Marin County and serves 9,000 daily users. Disruption of this facility will occur when SMART begins construction of the Larkspur Extension. While an Interim Facility has been developed that keeps all buses on the current site, there is recognition this is not ideal. A permanent location is being developed, with TAM programming and allocating funds to Golden Gate for the environmental studies and preliminary engineering for a new permanent facility ($1.25 M in OBAG2 funds) Golden Gate is working closely with the City of San Rafael and other partners including Marin Transit to address the long term need.

• The Marin-Sonoma Narrows HOV Lane Addition – the Marin Sonoma Narrows is a section of US101 that reduces from 4 lanes to 2 lanes in the northbound direction (north of Novato) and southbound direction (through Petaluma), causing significant delays. The addition of the HOV lane will increase person-throughput commiserate with the goals of MTC’s Managed Lanes Implementation Program, and reduce operation delays for Golden Gate Transit Regional Bus services. The corridor has been environmentally cleared and is a significant priority of the business community in Marin and Sonoma and is a top priority for the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.

• State Route 37 widening and sea-level rise adaptation - the multi-county State Route 37 is currently being considered for improvements as part of a multi-county Policy Advisory Committee, PAC, effort to address congestion in portions of the 1-lane segment of roadway and to address sea level rise on this vulnerable asset. Significant flooding of this facility in the winter of 2016/2017 led to record closures of this facility. A joint North Bay County proposal for improving this corridor is being considered by the North Bay CMA’s who collaboratively formed the State Routes 37 PAC.

• Direct Connector from Northbound Highway 101 to Eastbound I-580 - The entry to the Richmond San Rafael Bridge from Northbound Highway 101 and Sir Francis Drake in Marin is the only toll bridge entry in the entire Bay Area that includes low speed local road traffic signals, causing significant delays to Highway 101, to Interstate 580 in Marin, and to local roads, especially those in San Rafael and Larkspur. This Connector is a long standing public priority that first came to prominence during the Greenbrae Corridor Working Group process of 2013, and is strongly supported throughout Southern Marin.

• Bike/Pedestrian Pathway improvements – In addition to the multi modal elements of a number of the other projects included for consideration, MTC may likely develop a category of eligible improvements for bicycle and pedestrian access in and affecting the toll corridors, while likely not listing specific projects. TAM staff presented, and the bike community found acceptable, bike and pedestrian projects for consideration in a larger regional category , to include the following:

o Central Marin Regional Gap Closure Project: Wornum Drive o San Quentin Area Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Study Improvements o San Rafael Transit Center Access Improvements o Multi-Use Pathway - 2nd Street to Andersen Drive

• Highway 101 / Local Road Interchange Improvements - A program of improvements to local road

interchanges would improve congestion and provide multi-modal improvements in Marin. The TAM Board heard a number of interchange improvements including the following locations:

o Tiburon Blvd / East Blithedale Interchange o Tamalpais Drive Interchange o San Rafael Onramp at 2nd Street and Hetherton o Merrydale Road / North San Pedro Interchange o Manuel T Freitas Parkway Interchange o Lucas Valley / Smith Ranch Road Interchange

• Highway 101 related transit access and efficiency-related capital improvements - In order to

maximize our regional transit services and provide an attractive service, a category of transit access

70


capital and efficiency related capital improvements were presented to the TAM Board, including the bus-on-shoulder proposal to Caltrans, Park and ride improvements, and transit access needs at interchanges.

Note that the Marin Transit Board directed their staff to prepare a submittal to TAM from Marin Transit that illustrates their priorities for Regional Measure 3 funding. Staff has been in close contact with Marin Transit staff, and included in this transmittal what will be likely candidates from Marin Transit. Marin Transit will not approve a transmittal until their meeting of March 20th, right before the TAM Board meeting of March 23rd. Staff believes we have covered the likely items coming from Marin Transit’s request letter, specifically the permanent Bettini Transit Center, the Marin transit operations and Maintenance facility, and Marin Transit bus rehab. Note TAM staff has reached out to the Golden Gate Bridge Highway and Transportation District who confirmed their top priority is funding for the Permanent Bettini Transit Center. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS MTC in its draft legislative package for 2017 considered sponsoring legislation to place a ballot measure asking Bay Area voters to approve a bridge toll increase to fund congestion relief projects for improved mobility in the nine-county Bay Area toll bridge corridors. This bridge toll increase, referred to as Regional Measure 3 or RM3, would provide a much-needed funding source for regional projects at a time of declining- and unpredictable- federal and state revenues. MTC is securing a sponsor for the RM3 toll legislation and determining how the development of the Expenditure Plan will occur. MTC has a special legislative ability to consider ballot measures for the Bay Area toll bridges (with the exception of the district managed Golden Gate Bridge). In previous bridge toll programs, RM1 passed in 1988 and RM2 passed in 2004, an expenditure plan was prepared and adopted by the state legislature as part of the authorizing legislation process. The legislation will authorize MTC to seek voter approval for the fee increase and the expenditure plan defining how the fee will be used. The toll program is unique in that it is regional in nature and the tolls from the seven state-owned toll bridges are pooled together to fund projects throughout the bridge system. This means that Marin does not necessarily get the tolls form the Richmond San Rafael Bridge for our use. It also means that we may advance projects from a Bay Area wide toll stream. The toll revenue provides a benefit to those paying the fees (i.e. toll bridge users) or mitigates for the activity associated with the fees. As fees, toll increases are subject to a simple majority vote, 50% + 1, rather than two-thirds required in measures for tax increases for specific purposes. In the case of RM1 and RM2, the vote was tallied region-wide, rather than county-by-county, and the same will be done under Regional Measure 3. On December 14th, MTC’s Commission hosted a Commissioner workshop on RM3 to solicit guidance on policy considerations and principles for an expenditure plan as part of the RM3 toll program. Some of the highlighted policy considerations include: MTC is considering placing a ballot measure authorizing an increase on the primary or general election in 2018. MTC is aware of many counties region-wide that may try for the 2018 November ballot for sales tax re-authorizations or increases. It is critical for MTC to not lock into November 2018 as their voter date. There could be measures in several counties that could be adversely affected. It may be best to avoid competing transportation ballot measures on a single ballot. It would behoove MTC to closely coordinate, and consider the impacts to a county going for their own county sales tax (Marin, Sonoma, San Francisco, Contra Costa have all mentioned this as a possibility)- the risk could exist, mostly for the 2/3rds threshold that counties have to achieve.

71


MTC is considering a $1-$2-$3 toll surcharge, with an option to phase in the increase above $1over time, and a peak period pricing mechanism. Funds generated for the $1 and $2 options are shown below:

Programs Being Considered by MTC MTC hosted a stakeholder outreach meeting on Monday February 13th. This outreach meeting was the first of several meetings to be held, with meetings likely to be held for each bridge corridor, though this has yet to be finalized.

In the MTC presentation at this workshop, MTC staff presented suggested categories of investment. They are as follows: Bridge Rehabilitation, Express Lane Corridors, Freight, Bay Trail, BART Expansion Cars, and Transit Access Improvements. TAM staff understands MTC may be reconsidering these categories. There is much additional discussion that needs to occur with the MTC Commission regarding this, and Marin’s MTC Commissioner, Supervisor Damon Connolly, will have an important role. TAM projects of interest could be specifically listed in the legislation. MTC may also put forward categories, such as some of those shown above- Bay Trail for example—that TAM projects would fit into, but would not be specifically listed. In February, MTC announced that any legislation to allow for an increase to the toll bridges is pending, until further discussions on the State’s transportation package can occur. TAM staff is requesting the TAM Board to identify priorities for the MTC Bay Area bridge toll increase. Executive Committee Review This item was presented to both Executive Committees who made recommendations to the TAM Board to approve the Tier Approach to project submittal to MTC. Additional categories of evaluation were recommended to be included in TAM’s decision making. These categories included the following:

• Inclusion of Climate Change consideration in project selection • Include Project readiness in the project selection

Staff has reviewed the candidate pool and believes the Tiered Projects Approach remains valid and projects are well placed within that approach with the additional criteria taken into consideration. The Executive Committee members also raised the policy discussion of supporting a variety of transit and highway projects for consideration by MTC. Again, staff recommends the Tiered Projects Approach meets this recommendation in both Tier One and Tier Two.

The Executive Committee also recommended that TAM develop a strategic approach in partnership with other North Bay CMA’s be pursued, which is being done. Finally, the Executive Committees recommended that TAM be realistic regarding the funding it can expect. Staff noted that with Marin representing 4% of the total Bay Area toll revenue collected, and it being

72


undecided whether tolls will be increased by $1 or $2, and it being undecided what will be the outcome of revenue- and assigned expenditures- for extending RM2, that the projects in Tier One are collectively achievable for Marin County. TAM staff estimates that up to $200M could be made available for projects in Marin if MTC chooses to propose a $2 Bridge toll increase over a 20 year period. TAM staff will return to the TAM Board for further discussions regarding these projects when the need arises. RECOMMENDATION Based on the comments from the TAM Executive Committee, Staff recommends that the TAM Board consider adopting Tier One candidates for consideration by MTC to be included in the Regional Measure 3 proposal. Staff recommend Tier Two candidates be adopted as well. Finally, staff recommends a pool of candidates to be brought forward “if the opportunity arises”. The candidate pools are described as follows: Tier One: • Bettini Transit Center Permanent Relocation - $25M • US 101/I-580 Direct Connector Project– $135M (existing footprint Curve Connector) - $255M ( Hillside

Connector) • US 101 Marin Sonoma Narrows Carpool Lane and Multi-Use path system - $42M - $75 M ( bridges all

rebuilt) • State Route 37 Multi-Modal Corridor Project – $20M ( amongst 4 counties)

Tier Two: • Highway Interchange Improvements • Highway 101 Transit Capital Elements (Transit Access, Bus On Shoulder and Park and Ride

Improvements) • Bike and Pedestrian Program of Projects • Marin Transit Local O&M Facility Opportunity Candidates: • Bike and Pedestrian Candidates (same group as above) • Local and Regional Transit rehab needs • Local Streets and Roads rehab needs FISCAL CONSIDERATION At this point in time, there is no direct project funding plan necessary. MTC’s expenditure plan process in the next several months could require more discussion of matching funds from other sources. When this occurs, the TAM Board will engage in further analysis, discussion, and necessary action. NEXT STEPS Staff will work with the North Bay County Transportation Agencies and MTC to submit Marin’s RM3 eligible transportation needs for inclusion in future RM3 legislation. ATTACHMENTS N/A

73


74


Derek McGill, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Consider the Origin & Destination Data Collection Draft Report (Discussion), Agenda Item

No. 9 RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the Board consider the Origin & Destination Data Collection Draft Report and offer comments and further direction. Comments received by the Board will be addressed and the report will be finalized. The data provided in the final report will be used in the development of the TAM Travel Demand Model (TAMDM). The full draft data collection report can be viewed at the following link: http://www.tam.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=10702 BACKGROUND In 2016, TAM retained an on-call model development consultant to develop the next generation of Marin’s Travel Demand Model, specifically the travel demand forecasting tool to assess future travel volumes on local roadways, highways and transit systems. TAM has operated the Marin Travel Model as its primary forecasting tool, however increasing costs of maintaining outdated software, and challenges with lack of functionality have led to the need to develop the next generation of the Model. TAM has historically prepared origin and destination surveys as part of a project level assessment to understand the travel behaviors being addressed by a proposed project. Beginning in 2016 TAM began an update to its Origin and Destination Studies to assess Countywide travel behaviors to support the development of TAM’s new Travel Demand Model This new origin and destination collection report will help TAM and our member agencies better understand our local travel patterns. TAM’s model development Consultant, Fehr and Peers, have piloted the use of extremely large data sources, referred to as “Big Data” collected from mobile phones, GPS devices and automobiles to provide a cost effective approach to once burdensome system of mail surveys, traffic counting and license plate reader technology. This ‘Big Data” approach allows for 75 million origin and destination points to be included in the analysis of Marin County’s travel behavior. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS TAM working with its travel model consultant developed an approach to obtain origin –destination data for three primary purposes:

1. Provide a detailed source of information for origin and destination relationships, between Marin County and other counties, and within Marin County as well. A zone structure was set up for 30

75



zones in Marin County, and 10 zones including the 8 other bay area counties, for a total 40 x 40 zone structure.

2. Obtain a better understanding of origin and destinations of users of 11 specific Marin County Roadways, including the Highway 101 at the Marin Sonoma County Line, State Route 37, the Richmond San Rafael Bridge and the Golden Gate Bridge.

3. Determine “work” locations of commuters who live in specific “home” zones, to provide information related to a wide range of planning activities.

The following series of charts and graphs are a sample of the information provided in the draft origin and destination study report. This information, along with other examples will be discussed and summarized by staff at the Board meeting. County Level Data The collected data was analyzed during the Origin and Destination study to show relationship between each county in the bay area in estimated AM (6-10am) and PM (3-7PM) peak periods. County origins are shown on the X-axis and destination on the Y-axis for the AM Peak period.

COUNTYWIDE O-D DATA – AM PEAK PERIOD COUNTY-TO-COUNTY FLOWS

County

Sono

ma

Nap

a

Sola

no

Wes

t Co

ntra

Ea

st C

ontr

a Co

sta

Nor

th

Alam

eda

San

Fran

cisc

o

San

Mat

eo

Sout

h Al

amed

a

Sant

a Cl

ara

Mar

in

Tota

l

Sonoma 0 0 20 182 25 721 3,413 664 100 138 8,525 13,787

Napa 4 0 0 1 0 2 449 108 1 14 1,039 1,618

Solano 42 0 0 0 0 0 119 3 0 0 1,428 1,593

West Contra Costa

199 0 0 0 0 0 273 0 0 0 4,126 4,599

East Contra Costa

195 0 0 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 2,251 2,471

North Alameda

618 1 0 0 0 0 82 0 0 0 3,981 4,682

San Francisco 1,179 380 65 227 2 13 0 0 0 0 7,172 9,039

San Mateo 255 15 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 820 1,098

South Alameda

96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 665 761

Santa Clara 170 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 282 454

Marin 3,827 512 676 585 752 2,455 13,080 2,093 369 740 163,837 188,926

Total 6,585 910 768 995 779 3,191 17,441 2,867 470 892 194,128 229,027

76


As a percentage of these tables, additional data regarding trips within Marin have been developed and are shown below. Approximately 13 percent more total trips occur during the PM peak period, with a majority of those trips being intra-Marin County trips likely representing shopping, recreational, or visitor trips. Additionally, intra-Marin County trips comprise 71.5 and 71.9 percent of total trips, trips passing through Marin County comprise 4.3 and 3.8 percent of total trips, and inter-county trips comprise 24.2 and 24.3 percent of total trips, in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.

Additionally, AM Peak Period data is shown below for trips in and out of Marin from neighboring counties.

AM PEAK PERIOD TRIPS INTO MARIN COUNTY

4.3% 3.8%13.2% 11.9%11.0% 12.4%

71.5% 71.9%

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%

Morning Afternoon

What types of trips are occurring within Marin County?

Trips Passign Through Marin County Trips Into Marin County

Trips Out of Marin County Intra-Marin County Trips

28%

3%

5%

14%

7%

13%

24%

3%

2%

1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Sonoma

Napa

Solano

West Contra Costa

East Contra Costa

North Alameda

San Francisco

San Mateo

South Alameda

Santa Clara

77


AM PEAK PERIOD TRIPS OUT OF MARIN COUNTY

Jurisdiction level data Origin and Destination data was also collected for jurisdictions within Marin. These summaries are shown below summarizing trips to-and-from each jurisdiction. A complete breakdown of each jurisdictions origin and destination’s patterns are included in the appendix of the report and not included in the staff report due to the extensive nature of the data collected.

AM PEAK PERIOD CITY AND TOWN ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS

Trip Origins Trip Origins Percentage City

Trip Destinations

Trip Destinations Percentage

2,446 1% Belvedere 1,304 1%

12,925 7% Corte Madera 18,158 9%

3,216 2% Fairfax 1,851 1%

22,363 12% Larkspur 22,141 11%

17,643 9% Mill Valley 14,776 8%

27,752 15% Novato 28,476 15%

3,626 2% Ross 2,063 1%

10,215 5% San Anselmo 7,011 4%

42,250 22% San Rafael 59,723 31%

10,630 6% Sausalito 11,938 6%

14,639 8% Tiburon 9,933 5%

21,220 11% Unincorporated 16,754 9%

15%

2%

3%

2%

3%

10%

52%

8%

1%

3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Sonoma

Napa

Solano

West Contra Costa

East Contra Costa

North Alameda

San Francisco

San Mateo

South Alameda

Santa Clara

78


In addition to the city and town level data above, home and work zones were developed to provide the percent of workers in each home zone that work in each work zone.

HOME AND WORK LOCATION DATA BY ZONE

Work Zone

Home Zone

Sausalito Tiburon,

Belvedere Mill

Valley

Corte Madera, Larkspur

Southern San Rafael, Fairfax, San Anselmo,

Ross

Terra Linda,

Northern San Rafael Novato

Sausalito 2% 1% 10% 3% 3% 1% 1%

Tiburon, Belvedere 1% 6% 2% 1% 3% 1% 1%

Mill Valley 7% 12% 3% 4% 6% 3% 4%

Corte Madera, Larkspur

7% 26% 11% 11% 17% 11% 10%

Southern San Rafael, Fairfax, San Anselmo, Ross

8% 6% 13% 18% 23% 28% 16%

Terra Linda, Northern San Rafael

0% 1% 1% 6% 4% 11% 8%

Novato 0% 6% 1% 2% 3% 10% 25%

Richmond, San Pablo 0% 1% 5% 1% 1% 2% 1%

Berkeley 4% 0% 4% 1% 3% 1% 1%

Oakland 1% 0% 1% 2% 2% 5% 2%

San Francisco 57% 37% 40% 41% 26% 16% 17%

South San Francisco, Peninsula

9% 1% 4% 1% 2% 2% 2%

Petaluma 2% 0% 1% 1% 3% 4% 4%

Santa Rosa 0% 0% 3% 4% 1% 1% 4%

Sonoma 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1%

Napa 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% 2% 1%

Vallejo, American Canyon

0% 0% 1% 2% 1% 2% 2%

Based on both of these data sets, the average daily trip length for Marin County trips was calculated and is 17 percent longer than the average daily trip length for Bay Area trips.

79


AVERAGE DAILY TRIP LENGTHS (MILES)

The graphic below shows the average daily trip length distribution for Marin County trips.

MARIN COUNTY DAILY TRIP LENGTH DISTRIBUTION (MILES)

Selected Facilities Origin and Destination Summaries TAM was able to assess the origin and destination of several regionally important locations including the following county gateways. The summary of the data collected at those locations are included below for selected time periods.

6.6 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 7.07.5

8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.59.1

10.2

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

7%

17%

33%

20%

14%

4%2% 1% 0% 1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

0-1 1-2 2-5 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 50-60 60+

80


US 101 at the Sonoma/Marin County Line (AM Peak)

Trip Origins Trip Origins Percentage County

Trip Destinations


10,975 69% Sonoma 4,967 31%

25 0% Napa 32 0%

34 0% Solano 19 0%

121 1% West Contra Costa 225 1%

140 1% East Contra Costa 18 0%

341 2% North Alameda 704 4%

905 6% San Francisco 2,485 16%

205 1% San Mateo 756 5%

56 0% South Alameda 135 1%

102 1% Santa Clara 161 1%

3,097 19% Marin 6,498 41%

10,975 69% Sonoma 4,967 31%

US 101 at the Golden Gate Bridge (PM Peak)

Trip Origins Trip Origins

Percentage Total Destinations Trip

Destinations Trip

Destinations Percentage

2,372 7% Sonoma 2,950 9%

351 1% Napa 145 0%

107 0% Solano 49 0%




16,587 52% San Francisco 11,405 36%

1,843 6% San Mateo 1,192 4%



9,941 31% Marin 15,715 49%

81


SR 37 at the Sonoma/Marin County Line (AM Peak)

Trip Origins Trip Origins

Percentage Total Destinations Trip

Destinations Trip

Destinations Percentage

3,814 38% Sonoma 1,321 13%

1,960 20% Napa 951 10%

1,284 13% Solano 749 7%




769 8% San Francisco 1,804 18%

83 1% San Mateo 454 5%



1,893 19% Marin 4,149 41%

I-580 at Contra Costa/Marin County Line (Richmond/San Rafael Bridge PM Peak)

Trip Origins Trip Origins Percentage

Total Destinations Trip Destinations


2,671 8% Sonoma 3,050 10%

507 2% Napa 165 1%

170 1% Solano 63 0%




9,573 30% San Francisco 9,201 29%

1,137 4% San Mateo 1,059 3%



17,610 55% Marin 18,187 57%

82


FISCAL CONSIDERATION N/A NEXT STEPS TAM will share the results of this study online and with our partner agencies to inform transportation planning decisions, future Model development, and climate action plan updates. ATTACHMENTS None. The full draft data collection report can be viewed at the following link: http://www.tam.ca.gov/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=10702

83



84

DATE: March 23, 2017 TO: Transportation Authority of Marin Board of Commissioners FROM: Dianne Steinhauser, Executive Director Nicholas Nguyen, Principal Project Delivery Manager SUBJECT: Consider Submitting Letter to MTC to Increase their Current Design Alternative Assessment

Scope of Work for State Route 37 to Include Traffic Analysis of Highway 101 Interchange; Agenda Item No. 10

RECOMMENDATION: Move to consider and approve submitting a letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) to increase their current Design Alternative Assessment (DAA) scope of work for State Route 37 (SR37) to include traffic impact analysis of Highway 101 (Hwy 101) interchange. BACKGROUND: SR 37 is a key transportation corridor linking several counties together. Due to its strategic transportation role and environmentally sensitive natural footprint, SR 37 has been the subject of not only a long-range planning study being conducted by UC Davis (UCD) and the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), but now by an Advisory Committee comprised of transportation authorities from Marin, Sonoma, Solano, and Napa. There have been three major accomplishments since the beginning of the year: (1) the Funding and Phasing Analysis work has commenced, (2) the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has committed up to $800,000 to fund a SR 37 corridor planning study focusing on the 2-lane portion of the highway, and (3) Caltrans has offered to assist in public outreach planning to complement the MTC-funded corridor study. DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS: When it was determined that a Caltrans planning grant was not going to be awarded to this corridor work, the Policy Committee solicited MTC’s support and ultimately obtained it in late 2016 for engineering evaluation of scope, phasing and cost of the corridor. The Project Leadership Team (PLT) worked with MTC staff to select a consultant to conduct the study, officially called the Design Alternative Assessment (DAA). The consulting firm of Kimley-Horn was selected and work has begun. MTC is administering the project and the PLT will advise. The intent of the study is to look at the entire length of SR 37 and identify needed projects along the corridor with a key emphasis on developing viable project alternatives for the 2-lane segment located in Solano and Sonoma counties, between Highway 121 and Mare Island. The study will build on previously conducted work, such as the UC Davis Road Ecology SR 37 study, and is anticipated to be complete by the end of 2017. The study will not specifically perform any traffic modeling of the traffic impact to Hwy 101 as a result of

85


2

improving the 2-lane segment located in Solano and Sonoma counties. Outreach is currently being conducted by each individual Congestion Management Agency, coordinating closely on content. Staff believes that it is not only in Marin County’s best interest, but of all Policy Committee members, to better understand the traffic impact to Hwy 101 and the Hwy 101/SR 37 interchange early in this corridor evaluation phase, as opposed to waiting for a future phase when the opportunity to do so may yield less than ideal alternatives. Staff believes savings have been realized by staff from TAM conducting outreach on behalf of the corridor PAC; outreach not currently being addressed by MTC or Caltrans. That outreach has yielded a need to answer the public about impacts on Hwy 101. FISCAL CONSIDERATION: There is no immediate cost to this recommended action. However, MTC will more than likely ask for TAM to substantially fund this effort. NEXT STEPS: If approved, staff will submit the attached letter to MTC and negotiate further work with them. ATTACHMENTS: Letter to MTC requesting traffic impact analysis to Hwy 101 and SR 37 interchange.

86

900 Fifth Avenue Suite 100 San Rafael California 94901

Phone: 415/226-0815 Fax: 415/226-0816

www.tam.ca.gov

Belvedere James Campbell

Corte Madera Diane Furst

Fairfax John Reed

Larkspur Dan Hillmer

Mill Valley Stephanie Moulton-Peters

Novato Eric Lucan

Ross P. Beach Kuhl

San Anselmo Tom McInerney

San Rafael Gary Phillips

Sausalito Ray Withy

Tiburon Alice Fredericks

County of Marin Damon Connolly Katie Rice Kathrin Sears Dennis Rodoni Judy Arnold

March 23, 2017

Andrew Fremier Deputy Executive Director, Operations Metropolitan Transportation Commission Bay Area Metro Center 375 Beale Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105-2066

RE: TAM Board request to address impacts on US Highway 101

Dear Mr. Fremier:

The Transportation Authority of Marin has been working closely through the MOU Policy Advisory Committee on State Route 37 to further evaluate options and costs in expanding the corridor and addressing sea level rise. We appreciate MTC’s commitment to conduct the Design Alternatives Analysis in the corridor, funding and managing that effort. However, the Transportation Authority believes additional work elements should be included, specifically the impact of widening SR 37 on Highway 101 traffic.

In conducting outreach for the SR 37 expansion effort, one of the top questions from the public, business community, and local elected officials in Marin is, “What is the impact on Highway 101 due to the widening of Route 37?”. As you may know, Highway 101 is significantly congested during the AM and PM peak periods and on the weekends especially at the interchange with SR 37. TAM has assured Marin consitituents and businesses that the impacts on Highway 101 will be taken into consideration and mitigated as part of the overall project. We recognize that opening up the Rt. 37 bottleneck will put pressure on other areas of the corridor including the interchange with Highway 101. We request that the Metropolitan Transportation Commission evaluate this as part of the Design Alternative Analysis.

TAM is willing to increase its contribution to the corridor study for this effort. We request options from your consultant team on how best to accomplish this request including a range of costs associated with various work elements.

It has been a pleasure working with MTC, to date, on the corridor and we look forward to continuing cooperation.

Thank you,

Stephanie Moulton-Peters Chair, Transportation Authority of Marin

Item 10 - Attachment

87

Documents

TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN BOARD OF · PDF file03/06/2017 · Kathrin Sears Dennis Rodoni ... BART Bay Area Rapid Transit: ... TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY OF MARIN TAM FEBRUARY