HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07191988 - 2.6 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON, C�,����}}tra,
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT f-
DATE: July 19, 1988 C' (rty
SUBJECT: Mandatory Review of the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area
SPECIFIC REQUEST S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) 6 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Adopt resolution determining that the mandatory review of the
Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan, as specified
therein, has been completed.
BACKGROUND
The Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan adopted by the
Board of Supervisors on June 7, 1983 specified that the Plan was to
be reviewed by the agencies responsible for implementation
according to the following schedule:
1) After approval of a minimum ,of a total of
1. 5 million gross square feet of commercial/office
development within the Specific Plan Area or within the
immediate market area within 2000 feet of the Specific
Plan Area; or
2) By January 1 , 1990, which ever occurs first.
The review was to include an assessment of the major impacts of
permitted but not yet approved development.
The Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Steering Committee, comprised
of representatives of the cities of Concord, Pleasant Hill, and
Walnut Creek, BART, Contra Costa Centre Association, Walden
Improvement Association, TSM.Advisory Committee, and the County,
has been meetg--since March to review relevant data. A
Technical Co ittee comprised of staff of the public agencies has
been meeting concurrently.
The focus of the review was traffic impacts. The review of existing
studies, plus additional studies commissioned, indicated that the
traffic impact of the development within the Specific Plan Area was
mitigated by the improvement and TSM measures required of the Plan
Area developers; that the relative level of traffic mitigation
required in the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area was equal to or
greater than mitigation measures required in similar central County
office complexes; and that regional growth was utilizing the
existing capacity of major arterials improved to support the
development in the Plan Area.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHI92IT: YES SIGNATURF,
RECOMMENDATION .OF•.COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATIO OF ARD TTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON July 19, 1988 APPROVED AS RECEDED X OTHER
Evelyn M. Munn, Vice Mayor of the City of Walnut Creek, appeared to
present testimony on the above matter, and submitted prepared material
(Exhibit, A attached) .
The Board discussed the matter.
1.
J
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that Resolution 88/459, determining that
the mandatory review of the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific
Plan, as specified therein, is completed, is ADOPTED.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
cc: Community Development (Orig. ) ATTESTED July 19 , 1988
County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Redevelopment Agency THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
County AdministratorAN COUNTYL.,_,
INISTRATOR
BYV DEPUTY
ra27:phbart.sp
JK:krc
2.
TESTIMONY .BY WALNUT CREEK MAYOR PRO-TEM EVELYN MUNN
SUBJECT: PLEASANT HILL BART STATION
AREA SPECIFIC PLAN HEARING, JULY 19, 1988
MISTER CHAIRMAN,' MEMBER&OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, I AM EVELYN MUNN,
MAYOR PRO-TEM OF THE CITY OF WALNUT CREEK, AND A MEMBER OF.THE PLEASANT
HILL BART STATION AREA PLAN. I `WISH TO THANK YOU,FOR THE. OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK BEFORE YOU ON THE. ISSUE OF THE PLEASANT HILL BART STATION AREA
SPECIFIC PIAN. AS YOU ARE AWARE, WE ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE
IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AND HAVE BEEN WORKING COOPERATIVELY
WITH THE STEERING COMMITTEE AND-WITH YOUR STAFF TO DEVELOP A PROGRAM
WHICH WILL :BE ACCEPTABLE TO ALL THE INTERESTED PARTIES. THERE HAVE BEEN
A .NUMBER-OF PROPOSALS MADE TO THIS END, AND THERE .ARE STILL SOME AREAS
OF .CONCERN-WHICH I WISH TO ADDRESS. IN RAISING OUR CONCERNS., I DO NOT
WISH TO BELITTLE THE SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF WORK WHICH THE COU!NTY'AND
DEVELOPERS HAVE DONE. INSTEAD, I AM CONCENTRATING ON THE AREAS WHICH WE
NERD ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.. WE WOULD ASK THAT THE MANDATORY SPECIFIC
PLAN REVIEW NOT BE.CONSIDERED COMPLETED UNTIL THESE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN
ANSWERED. AS OF LAST EVENING, WE HAD NOT RECEIVED A COPY OF THE COUNTY
AGENDA, SO IF MY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED, I APOLOGIZE FOR MY
REDUNDANCY.. I WILL ADDRESS THESE INDIVIDUALLY BELOW:
1. AS A RESULT OF INPUT RECEIVED FROM THE STEERING COMMITTEE,, SUPERVISOR
MCPEAK HAS PROPOSED TO REDUCE THE OVERALL PLEASANT HILL. BART STATION
AREA DEVELOPMENT BY 500,000 SQUARE FEET. IT IS UNCLEAR WHAT THE NEW
SQUARE FOOTAGE WOULD BE, SINCE THE SPECIFIC PLAN HAD IDENTIFIED A RANGE
OF DEVELOPMENT WHICH VARIES BY ARPROXIMATELY 500,000 SQUARE FEET FROM
THE HIGH.TO LOW ENDS OF THE RANGE. IF THE REDUCTION IS FROM BOTH THE
HIGH AND LOW ENDS OF THE DEVELOPMENT RANGE, THEN IT REPRESENTS A
SIGNIFICANT OFFER FROM THE COUNTY, AND RESPONDS TO THE CONCERNS OF BOTH
THE CITY OF WALNUT CREEK AND THE STEERING COMMITTEE BY PROVIDING A
SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION TO THE PROJECT SCALE.
2. WE ARE VERY HOPEFUL ABOUT THE PROPOSAL TO DEVELOP A NEnX= OF PARR
AND RIDE-LOTS TO SERVE THE STATION AREA. THIS HAS BEEN ONE.'OF THE
CITY'S CONCERNS. IT APPEARS TO RESPOND TO THE DESIRES OF BOTH THE CITY
AND THE STEERING COMMITTEE. WE WOULD LIKE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS
PROPOSAL, INCLUDING THE FUNDING PLAN. WE WOULD LIKE TO ASSIST IN
TECHNICAL WORK TO DEVELOP THE LOCATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PARK. AND RIDE
LOTS.
3. THE RELIANCE IN THE AREA TSM ORDINANCE TO REDUCE. TRAFFIC BY 35 TO 45
PERCENT IS OVERLY OPTIMISTIC AS A TRAFFIC CONGESTION REDUCTION MEASURE.
WHILE WE ARE IMPRESSED WITH THE COUNTY'S ORDINANCE AND SANCTIONS, THE
FACT THAT THE REQUIRED REDUCTIONS CAN BE MET BY RIDESHARING OR BY A
SHIFT IN COMMUTING, TIMES CAUSES SOME CONCERN. BASED ON THE GROWTH OF
TRAFFIC IN THE AREA AND THE PROJECTIONS FROM THE CITY'S TRAFFIC MODEL,
IT IS OUR BELIEF THAT THE AMOUNT OF TIME THE AREA'S ROADS WILL BE
CONGESTED WILL INCREASE AS PEOPLE SHIFT COMMUTE TIMES REGARDLESS OF ANY
ESTABLISHED TSM PROGRAM. INSTEAD OF JUST ONE HOUR OF PEAK TRAFFIC IN
EACH DIRECTION, WE MAY HAVE SEVERAL, AND GtT LITTLE. BENEFIT FROM THE
ALTERNATIVE COMMUTE TIMES AND THE COUNTY'S TSM PROGRAM. THE CITY OF
WALNUT CREEK DOES NOT ALLOW CREDIT FOR ALTERNATIVE COMMUTE TIMES IN ITS
TSM ORDINANCE.
4. WHILE THE COUNTY HAS COMMITTED A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF'FUNDING TO
PURCHASE THE SOUTHERN PACIFIC RIGHT OF WAY, WE ARE NOT AWARE OF A
FUNDING PLAN OR PROGRAM TO ACTUALLY CONSTRUCT THE EXTENSION OF BANCROFT.
THIS IS TRUE OF SEVERAL OF THE OTHER PROPOSED TRAFFIC MITIGATIONS
IDENTIFIED IN THE PHASE II TRAFFIC STUDY. THOSE IDENTIFIED, BUT NOT
FUNDED'MITIGATIONS INCLUDE THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE TREAT
BOULEVARD/BANCROFT ROAD INTERSECTION AND .THE MO AMU/BANCROFT
INTERSECTION, THE WIDENING OF MONUMENT BETWEEN CONTRA COSTA BOULEVARD
AND BANCROFT, AND THE ADDITION OF ANOTHER WESTBOUND LANE ON TREAT
BETWEEN BANCROFT AND JONES ROAD: SOMEHOW, THE COMPLETION OF THESE
IMPROVEMENTS SHOULD BE PHASED TO OCCUR AT THE SAME TIME AS THE INCREASED
TRAFFIC GENERATED IN THE AREA. THIS IS CONISISTENT WITH THE CONCEPT OF
LEVEL SERVICE PROPOSED BY THE TRANSPORTATION PARTNERSHIP GROWTH
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM AND.SUPERVISOR MC PEAK'SRECOMMENDATION.
5. THE' PROPOSED MITIGATIONT MEASURE TO ADD DUAL RIGHT TURN LANES FROM
TREAT BOULEVARD ONTO NORTH MAIN STREET FOR THE SOUTHBOUND I-680 ONRAMP
IS NOT ACCEPTABLE 70 WALNUT CREEK SINCE IT WILL VIRTUALLY MAKE THE
EXISTING GAS -STATION AND SHOPPING CENTER INACCESSIBLE, AND SEVERELY
LIMIT THE UTILITY OF THE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING. ALSO, THE PROPOSAL TO ADD
CAPACITY FOR THE PM PEAK AT THIS LOCATION HAS NOT BEEN BALANCED WITH AN
EQUAL INCREASE FOR THE AM TRAFFIC PEAK.
6. THE CITY HAS ALWAYS BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THE LACK OF FREEWAY
INTERSECTION CAPACITY IN THE VICINITY OF THE PLEASANT HILL BART STATION,
AND FEELS THAT ADDITIONAL WORK SHOULD BE DONE TOWARD THE CONSTRUCTION OF
DIRECT FREEWAY RAMPS BETWEEN HIGHWAY I-680 AND THE PLEASANT HILL BART
STATION.
7. THE CITY SUPPORTS SUPERVISOR MCPEAK'S PROPOSAL FOR A TRAFFIC IMPACT
FEE FOR REGIONAL/FREEWAY ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS, AND RECOGNIZE THAT
DEVELOPERS WILL BE PAYING A SUBSTANTIAL TOTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE. WE
ARE CONCERNED THAT $.50 PER SQUARE FOOT WILL PROVIDE A RELATIVELY
LIMITED TOTAL AMOUNT OF FUNDS AT BUILDOUT. THE COUNTY SHOULD ATTEMPT TO
USE THE FEE TO LEVERAGE STATE HIGHWAY FUNDS.
THE CITY HAS BEEN'WORKING TO IMPROVE ROADS IN THE AREA TO HANDLE THE
PROJECTED TRAFFIC INCREASES IN THE AREA, AND HAS BEEN USING A
COMBINATION OF CITY AND' FAU FUNDS TO CONSTRUCT PROJECTS WHICH ADD TO
THE TRAFFIC PROJECTED FOR THE AREA AROUND THE BART STATION. THESE
INCLUDE:
WIDENING TREAT FROM FOUR TO SIX LANES FROM CANDELERO TO THE EASTERN
CITY LIMITS
INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT MINERT ROAD AND DAVID AVENUE
WIDEN BANCROFT ROAD TO FOUR LANES FROM MINERT TO YGNACIO
WIDEN OAK ROAD TO FOUR LANES FROM JONES ROAD TO WALDEN ROAD
WIDEN NORTH MAIN STREET TO FOUR LANES FROM LESNICK LANE TO PARKSIDE
INSTALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT CIVIC DRIVE AT WALDEN ROAD
RECONSTRUCT THE NORTH MAIN, GEARY', TREAT, AND OAK PARK FREEWAY
INTERCHANGES. THIS WORK INCLUDED THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
INTERSECTIONS OF MAIN STREET AT TREAT AND MAIN STREET AT SUNNYVALE
WE HAVE COMPLETED A NUMBER OF PROJECTS WITHOUT ANY ASSISTANCE FROM THE
COUN'T'Y.
A NUMBER OF THE PROJECTS IN WALNUT CREEK BUT NEAR TO THE PLEASANT HILL
BART AREA STATION, SUCH AS THE OAK ROAD WIDENING, ARE BEING DONE TO
SERVE THE PROJECTED COUN'T'Y AREA NEEDS. WHILE THE COUNTY HAS CONSTRUCTED
A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF IMPROVEMiENTS IN THE AREA, WE EXPECT THE COUNTY
TO BOTH PLAN AND CONSTRUCT THE PROJECTS NEEDED TO MITIGATE THE FUTURE
TRAFFIC CAUSED BY THE PLANNED AND PROGRAMMED DEVELOPMENT.
THANK YOU-VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING TO AND ADDRESSING OUR CONCERNS. WE
WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS NOW OR IN WRITING.
IT1151
L
MQ_N A
- 0(1
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson and Schroder
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Resolution No'. 88/459
A RESOLUTION DETERMINING THAT THE MANDATORY REVIEW OF THE
PLEASANT HILL BART STATION AREA SPECIFIC PLAN, AS SPECIFIED
THEREIN, HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
WHEREAS, the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan,
adopted by the Board of Supervisors on June 7 , 1983, specified
that the Plan was to undergo a mandatory review upon certain
thresholds; and
WHEREAS, the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan
Steering "Committee
which,.,is •comprised-.or ..r.epresentatives of the
cities of Concord, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek, the Bay Area
Rapid Transit District, the Contra Costa Centre Association, the
Walden Improvement Association, the TSM Advisory Committee, and
the County, has been reviewing the status and traffic impacts of
completed, approved and proposed development in the Specific Plan
Area and surroundings;
WHEREAS, the Steering Committee has received and accepted
the following major reports and studies:
1) Pleasant Hill BART Development Fact Sheet dated
6/22/88.
2 ) A Ten-Year Comparison of Traffic Mitigation Measures
for Office Projects in Four Agency Study Areas dated
6/11/88.
3 ) Pleasant Hill BART Traffic Studies-Phases I & II dated
6/8/87 and 7/1/87 respectively and Summary Thereof
dated 6/3/88.
4) Walnut Creek. Traffic Model Summary dated 6/9/88.
5) Pleasant Hill Catchment Area Study dated,_7/6,/88..
6) Traffic Study Reconciliation Report dated" l."/H .
7) A Origin/Destination Study dated as of 7/8/88.
WHEREAS, the Steering Committee identified and discussed
additional traffic mitigation measures` that may be implemented to
mitigate regional traffic problems.
THEREFORE, the Board of Supervisors makes the following
findings:
1 ) That the improvements required to be financed and to be
built by the developers/property owners have mitigated
the impacts oftheir development prior to their being
built and occupied;
2) The regional impacts resulting from the planned
development meet the traffic service level objectives
adopted in the Specific Plan provided the mandatory TSM
objective is met.
3 ) That the magnitude of mitigation fees required includ-
ing traffic, were comparable to or in excess of similar
concentrations of office developments in the Central
County; and
4) That the increased road capacity provided for and paid
by the Area developers/property owners has been used by
regional traffic even though the. region has not paid
for its fair share of impacts; and
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Board of Supervisors
determines that the mandatory Review requirements as specified in
the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan have been
satisfied and is determined to be completed.
1 hereby certify that Wo is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on tho minutes of the
Board of Supe ors rt the date shown.�
ATTESTED:
PIT.BA p E , Clerks of the Board
of Supervisoo, an County Administrator
B
By , Deputy
cc: Community Development Department
Redevelopment Agency
County Counsel
County Administrator
Resolution No. 88/459