HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09011987 - S.5 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
FROM: Supervisor Sunne Wright McPeak
Costa
DATE: September 1 , 1987 County
SUBJECT: TRANSPORTATION GROWTH MANAGEMENT MEASURE
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS:
1 . The Board of Supervisors shall accept the recommendation
of TRANSPAC and appoint a delegation to a Steering
Committee to begin work on a "grassroots" effort for the_
-development of a County transportation plan funding
measure and growth management measure.
2 . The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors shall
dedicate itself to placing a joint transportation and
growth measure on the countywide ballot as soon as
consensus is reached with the Transportation Partner-
ship.
3 . The Board. of Supervisors recognizes the need to work
with the cities in developing a joint effort to simul-
taneously manage growth and provide for transportation
improvements .
4 . The Board of Supervisors shall refer to the County
Transportation Committee and the Steering Committee,
the documents attached to Supervisors Powers ' rec-
ommendations .
5 . The County shall offer staff support to the Transpor-
tation Partnership and the Steering, Committee until
permanent staff is secured.
6 . The Transportation Partnership will be responsible for
determining the transportation plan component of the
ballot measure.
7 . The County shall explore ways to coordinate with Alameda
and Solano Counties in its efforts to address trans-
portation and growth issues .
8 . The Board Transportation Committee shall monitor the
progress of the Steering Committee and report
regularly to the- 'Board of Supervisors .
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON September 1 , APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT 3 ) 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Administrator ATTESTED September 1 , 1987
Transportation Partnership
Transportation Committee Phi! Mche!or, C!erk of1he
Community Development- Supervisors and County Administrator
Transportation Planning n
M382/7-83 BY =(yam DEPUTY
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Contra
FROM: Tom Powers, First District Supervisor
Costa
DATE: August 25, 1987 Oio County
SUBJECT: Linkage of the General Plan Process with the Transportation Partnership
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION:
1. That the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors dedicate itself
to placing a joint transportation and growth measure on the June or
November, 1988 ballot to be adopted countywide.
2. That the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors recognize the
need to work with the cities in developing a joint effort to
simultaneously manage growth and provide for transportation
improvements. This effort should include the following steps to ensure
proper coordination: .
A) Attachment One, "Contra Costa Growth Management and Traffic
Improvement Plan," should be forwarded to both the Contra Costa
Transportation Partnership and the General Plan Congress to ensure
proper understandings are achieved relative to the tasks ahead of us.
B) A schedule of events similar to Attachment Two should be
.developed to help coordinate efforts by the Transportation Partnership
and the County. Timing is critical to ensure that both measures qualify
for the ballot at the same time.
C) The Transportation Partnership will be responsible for
determining the composition of the transportation plan and how it will
be presented to voters. The County will immediately provide staff
support to the Partnership until a permanent staff is selected.
D) The County will formulate a plan for managed growth throughout
Contra Costa County. This plan will incorporate the current General
Plan Update linked to the Transportation Partnerships' proposal .
3. That the County explore ways to coordinate with Alameda and Solano
Counties in its efforts to address transportation and growth issues.
BACKGROUND:
There is an immediate need to select a time line and begin
preparing a ballot measure so we can insure proper growth and
transportation plans. This will be the only way to insure the future
vitality and quality of life for the residents of Contra Costa County.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: - X YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
Growth Management & Transportation
August 25, 1987
Page 2
BACKGROUND CONTINUED:
The cities and the County, through the Mayors' Conference, have
formed the Transportation Partnership to develop solutions to our
traffic problems in the hope that additional sales tax revenues will be
provided by a future ballot measure. At the same time the County is
updating its general plan in order to accommodate future managed growth.
These efforts need to complement each other and receive public support
in order to achieve their desired goals.
The Board of Supervisors has already met with its respective
counterparts from Solano and Alameda Counties. This dialogue should
continue as an important step in planning transportation and growth on a
regional level .
i
1
S ,5
CONTRA COSTA GROWTH MANAGEMENT
AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN
BACKGROUND
Growth management tools are necessary to prevent new development from
getting ahead of local governments ability to provide services .
Aggressive action is required in order to maintain the quality of life
that is so important to the residents of Contra Costa County.
Controls to prevent development in areas without adequate
infrastructure are recuired. Developer fees are needed in order to
insure that development pays for the infrastructure needed to support
the traffic it creates .
Traffic congestion problems in Contra Costa County are increasing at an
alara:.ing rate. State and federal funding is not adequate to deal with
current problems . Additional funds are needed in order to address
Contra Costa ' s current traffic problems.
PART I - GROWTH MANAGEMENT PLAN
Because traffic is increasing at a faster rate than public agencies can
fund or improve the traffic and cl--cuiation systems, the following
shall be included in the general pians and circulation elements of the
County and its cites :
Growth management plan. The county and each city shall develop
growth management plans detailing how new development will be
managed to insure that the quality of life of Contra Costa
residents is protected. The growth management pians of the county
and the cities shall include provisions for new and expanded
roads , streets, water supplies , fire protection services , schools ,
marks , open space , trails, chzld care and other infrastructure
improvements that are needed for current and future Contra Costa
residents.
The pians shall detail appropriate "levels of service" for the
various public services and infrastructure components .
Consideration will be given to providing a balance between jobs
and 'housing within cities or sub-areas of the county to reduce
dependence on the regional freeway system. The County and the
cities shall coordinate their pians with adjacent cities and
un.:r_corporated areas .
Provisions for adequate local road capacity and transit services
shall be included in the local plans . Consideration shall be
given to the timing of new development related to the availability
of infrastructure capacity to insure that existing residents are
not adversely impacted by new development .
Action Plan. Regional transportation plans will be developed for
eacih sub-region of the County (West , South, Central and East ) .
The Pians shall be adopted on or before January 1 , 1990. All
expenditures of local street and road improvement funds generated
by a local sales tay. and by developer fees imposed pursuant to
this Dian must be consistent to the regional plans , once adopted.
Ir_ addition to the above, the county and each city shall include
in their general plans, a community facility or similar element
detailing how road improvements, parks, schools, fire protection
services , open space , child care , trails , parks and other
infrastructure improvements (and services) will be provided for
new development . At a minimum, the action plans shall include
provisions for the following:
- Developer fees . Developer fees shall be established to
insure that new development is required to pay its way
and mitigate the impacts they create. Fees shall not be
less than:
- $2 . 00 per sq ft on office/commercial projects
- $1000 per unit on residential projects
- Transportation Systems Management ( TSM) Programs .
Co-mDrehensive TSM Dians and ordinances shall be adopted .
- Chi.d Care . The County and each city shall develop and
imr)l event a p;an for providing child care services to
its current and future residents .
- Omen Space . Provisions for the accuisition and
Dreservatio-n of oyen space for current and future
residents shalt be included.
PART II - TRAFFIC RELIEF PLAN
Improvements are required to Contra Costa 's highway and transit systems
ir_ order to dea_ with current traffic congestion problems . Due to a
severe s^ortfa:- in available state and federal funds, a new local
traffic authority needs to created to implement specific improvement
projects. Additional revenues will be provided through an increase in
the sales tax and the imposition of developer fees.
It is therefore proposed that a new County wide traffic authority be
created (membership per the Transportation Partnership mode: ) and the
sales tax in Contra Costa County be increased by one half cent for a
period of 20 years to fund the following projects :
ADD SPECIFIC PROJECTS AND COSTS
CCSales2 .
Cmrm COSU 0O1b1TX
DEVEWFA NT DEPARMW
DATE: June 19, 1987
TO: Barbara A. Neustadter
7200: Robert Chung
SUBJECT: SCI•MDUI.E FOR A BALLOT Irff SURE IN 1988
I have checked the deadlines for placing measures on the ballot. The latest
date to place a measure on the ballot for June 1988 is March 11, 1988 and
for November 1988 is "August •22, 1988. I have developed two schedules below
that shows the events and dates leading up to " Son of Measure C ".
As a point of reference, it took approximately 11 to 12 months from start to
finish to place Measure C on the ballot. My understanding, from discussions
with Maurice Shiu and Jim Causey, is that the Managers/Engineers Committee
met for at least 6 months to produce a project list from the City/County
Engineers' original list and another two months to develop the representat-
ion of the Measure C County Transportation Authority. The CCTAC then took
the time from mid-May to early August (approximately 3 months) to obtain the
approvals needed from the Cities, the MTC, and the County.
Other assumptions used in preparing these schedules are that the City/County
Engineers and County Planning staff will participate in the development of a
new Expenditure Plan. It also assumes that some form of the Deddah bill
will pass and that MTC will no longer be a significant player in this
process. If MTC is a player in this process via the SB-878 process then at
least two more months will have to be included in this process. Finally,
Tom DunneIs " $64,000. Pyramid Proposal' is used for the basis in establish-
ing a timeline.
1
,��a BArtar ec.�vt� 08 EVEHTe
1� r 1988
September January The CCTPC completes a recommen-
ded structure and representat-
ion for the proposed Colony
Transportation Authority (CTA)
and releases it to the SATCs
for review.
October February 'The Sub-area Transportation
Committees (SATC) review the
proposed organizational
structure and representation of
the Authority.
October March The CCTPC takes the comments
Erma the SATCs and begins to
prepare a draft Expenditure
Plan and organizational
structure of the proposed
Authority for review and
comment by the Cities and the
County.
November April A draft Expenditure Plan is
.� prepared and circulated for
review and comment.
December April Expenditure Plan is revised to
address the concerns of the
Cities and the County.
Public hearings are held
throughout the County by the
CCTPC for public input on the
draft Expenditure Plan.
1988
January May Revised Draft EScpenditure Plan
is formally released by the
Contra Costa Transportation
Partnership Commission to the
Cities, Towns and the County
for approval and adoption.
4
Na T' m o° a of
0440 O •, V v
r-+ a a ON m a s f+ a a1 •..
a
pp - +4+ " y m fVr 0
40 IS
O � " MQoi044 aN v� a
84 0
xmua bm .1 � a
am :; � �m
V
fr m
O
w
m sr O v
p v a3 m mm m 81� m +Ci • oa
,v N m V •.i 0 .!t V a !! U 01 C
s~ 4+ a V •, U V rt w ar o fr C t: 0
0 to i+ k a+ a1 0 -4 0 V 0 O • 0 W .4 14
.0 0 r+ 0 " r 0a sAIN k VVVVta
a a $0 aU 0 > m 01 mmaat
v v o m a $4 V 0 C 0 U 0 > ba 0 >•
Pi m U vCVV •+ 00V
Qa m a m m 0 asV O m t. o 0 •+
A x C m UC1O 0U0lp aVt0e
'Cb0 0 .0 .N, 0 a ar, a
A > b •y Cat a► it 041 .4 0 O V•4V C AVrlV 0
0 00ae0Nkt0 Cm > V U CsrC: " 14U .0CU
M V 16 m 0 •4 0 �, 0 -4 .+ 111 12 0 00 0 -, O 0 0 0 *-.
WO U C4 C .0 AX 3: M 44 ,-4 frb014 U 3 3c m 110 It
ary SK O I 1 1 1 r 1 1 t I t
0 bo
a � — - - -- - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - — — — - - - - -
o a
dg fr k 0414
m
a'' O • mw o tr co 3 QC o too d 0
0 M i+ m V w O R - 0 v fa +i V 0
O F d a) at0 044V O UO Uk13 > U 1
U 41C .0 a+i a V N d " m a O V C tg b m 171
H a 0 V tO Cl p t0 m C m a+ o " .0 v o 4 >+ 10 •-i
0 0 •i % CN000VA 0aU oo 0 >1
O V VUC3 asOv •.iitm m 'O0m 0x mV
a a al \ 0 v � 0 sAV -,TsV >r 111V UV V \ a %%.-1
p m m3 4J 14 X 03oCar = VCC 30 x
V p 00m0 0 14 C -+ 0 al 1+ r-4 C6
1 DIM fr " a A %4 s0V amv aUaa410 0 Vqq
>+ " $tbma t4 U •401 mfr 14 � al4O > O 08
r+ 00000 0C0 � 0Ck 00Cfr c d01it 0) 0
a .Csoatem a0 �-+ 080a � wU0aawca a0
►� r t t t t t t t t t t
ca
x
0
Hm
H
oa H HN
3 4 iAd i
R7 U
tiH
O N
I x
Ha aH a 0O
- - - - - - - - -
as - - - - - - 0za, - - Q - -
BCSEDQLE OF 372M
1988 1988
February 4 July 7 Conference of Mayors take
action to recommend approval of
the bcpenditure Plan prepared
by Contra Costa importation
Partnership Commission to be
placed on the ballot.
March 3 August 4 last Conference of Mayors
meeting before Board takes
action to place the Measure on
the ballot.
March 8 August 9 Last scheduled Board meeting
before deadline for placing
measure on the ballot.
March 11 August 11 Last day that the Board of
Supervisors can place a measure
on the ballot.
June 7 November 8 Election Day - Voters vote on
measure placed on ballot by the
`. Board of Supervisors.
5