Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09121995 - C143 J Contra t Costa TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS - County FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DATE: August 21 , 1995 SUBJECT: Report on Development of Regional Transportation Mitigation Program for Central County SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Approve the following principles for development of a Regional Transportation Mitigation Program for Cehtral County and request the Board's representative on TRANSPAC to convey these principles to TRANSPAC: 1 . Projects funded by a regional fee should be regional. 2. A clear "nexus" must be shown between the developments charged the fee and the project funded by the fee. 3. All phases of a project should be eligible for fee revenues. 4. Regional fees should not displace existing funding commitments to regional projects. 5. Existing fees which contribute to the same improvements to be funded by regional fees should be credited against the regional fee. 6. The regional fee should apply to all new development. 7. Control and expenditure of regional fees should be by an accountable fiscal agency. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR X RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE _ APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): J4ft Tom Torlakson ACTION OF BOARD ON 9/12/95 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 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. Orig Dept: Community Development ATTESTED September 12 , 1995 Contact: Ernest Vovakis, 646-2355 PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF cc: TRANSPAC THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND C=TYA NISTRATOR BYEPUTY ,y iI V Report on Central County Transportation Migitation Program August 21 , 1995 Page 2 FISCAL IMPACT None directly to County General Fund. A Regional Transportation Mitigation Program for Central County would impose an additional fee on development in the unincorporated areas of Central County. Funds generated from the fee would be used for specified transportation improvements in Central County. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The Contra Costa Transportation Authority has requested each of the four regional transportation planning committees to develop regional transportation mitigation programs (RTMP's) so that new development can "pay its way" and not create unmet demand for transportation facilities. TRANSPAC, the transportation planning committee for central Contra Costa, has included in its Action Plan, the development of a regional transportation mitigation fee and has developed some initial concepts for a fee (Exhibit A). At its July 20 meeting, TRANSPAC requested each of its member agencies to review these concepts and bring its position back to the Committee at the September 21 meeting of TRANSPAC. In reviewing the issues related to development of a regional fee, the Transportation Committee recommends that the following principles guide the development of a Central County Regional Transportation Mitigation Program: 1. Projects funded by a regional fee should be regional. TRANSPAC should identify the project(s) to be funded by the regional fee. These should be major projects which are regional in nature and which have the support of all jurisdictions of TRANSPAC. Regional fees should not be used for programs, such as transportation demand management or transit operations, since these would eventually consume the funds without offering a permanent improvement. Freeway projects such as interchange improvements and additional lanes would most easily meet this test. 2. A clear "nexus" must be shown between the developments charged the fee and the project funded by the fee. Case law and state legislation require that a direct connection be shown between develoment fees and the projects which pay the fees. Also, the extent of the transportation improvement funded by any individual development project must be "roughly proportional" to the need for the improvement attributable to that development. 3. All phases of a project should be eligible for fee revenues. Regional fees may be used for all costs related to project planning, environmental analysis, design, right-of-way acquisition, and construction. 4. Regional fees should not displace existing funding commitments to regional projects. Many regional projects have partial funding commitments from federal, state or local sources. Regional fees may be.part of a larger funding package that includes other funding sources, but they should not be used to replace existing funding commitments to regional projects. 5. Existing fees which contribute to the same improvements to be funded by regional fees should be credited against the regional fee. Regional fees would be in addition to any existing local fees. Any existing local fees which are also planned to fund the same regional improvements would be credited against the regional fee. In the event that a Countywide fee is adopted by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority in the future, the regional fee should be credited against this countywide fee. Report on Central County Transportation Migitation Program August 21 , 1995 Page 3 6. The regional fee should apply to all new development. The County does not support exemptions from regional fees because the funds lost as a result of these exemptions cannot be allocated to other development but must be paid from local revenue sources. If exemptions to the fee are considered by TRANSPAC, they should be the same in all regions. The fee should be based on trip generation rates. Developments such as senior citizen housing or transit-based housing that generate fewer trips than a comparable development, would pay smaller fees. 7. Control and expenditure of regional fees should be by an accountable fiscal agency. The entity assigned responsibility for administering the fee program must provide strict fiduciary accountability to its members. A narrowly-defined joint exercise of powers authority could perform this role. The amount of funding generated by a Central County regional fee depends on the amount of new development, the fee structure, and the projects to be funded by the fee. The development potential of Central County by the year 2010 has been estimated in the Central County Action Plan to be 18,200 housing units and office/industrial facilities to accommodate 43,000 new jobs. Based on a residential fee of $1 ,500 to $4,000 per unit and a commercial fee of $0.50 to $2.00 per square foot, the Action Plan provides the following estimates of the total revenue that would be generated by the year 2010 for illustrative purposes: F-samanial Goo comffw d Goo Gdodowum $1,500 per dwelling $0.50 per square $32,675,000 unit foot $3,000 per dwelling $1 .00 per square $65,350,000 unit foot $4,000 per dwelling $2.00 per square $94,300,000 unit foot A : DP.4yr Regional T. eg Transportation Mitigation Program Issues for Discussion at the June 22, 1995 TRANSPAC Meeting The TRANSPAC TAC has been discussing approaches and various elements of a Regional Transportation Mitigation Program (RTW) and would like to have a discussion with TRANSPAC on the identified issues before proceeding further in the development of a RTMP ProPosal- TECMCAL ISSUES 1. RTW fee to be keyed to major regional projects to meet nexus and rough proportionality requir®eats. 2. RTNP funds may be used for the planning environmental documentation, design, acquisition of right of way, construction of projects. Funds may be used as part of financial program to leverage state, federal, local funds. 3. Recommend using Central County Action Plan projections for determining development potentiaL 4. Use trip generation rates by land use (ITE). S. Establish a fee waiver for low income housing projects. 6. Project List Only projects from the Central County Action Plan are eligible to be included on the RTW list. which means funds are to be used for projects in Central County. It is anticipated that the need for the projects are included in the policies of the each jurisdiction's General Plan Growth Management or Circulation Element or the Contra Costa Congestion Management Program. AB 1600 5-year limitation on use of fees is a factor in establishing the project list. 7. Candidate Projects 1.680 HOVs $20M (+approx. S3.5M additional to extend to Sunnyvale ramps, if approved by Caltrans); already programmed project development funds in 1993 Strategic Plan may be available for the environmental assessment and other project development activities) Central County Traffic Operations Improvements (signal Interconnect projects, coordinated Central signal system operation/facilities) 1.680/SR 4 Interchange full improvements, current estimate S214M i' Martinez Intermodal Project - Martinez Ferry Service Project TDM Projects (identified in Central County Action Plan; see attached list) Transit Capital Projects (identified in the Central County Action Plan; see attached list) Transit Operations (identified in the Central County Action Man; we attached list) SR 242 improvements (beyond currently proposed widening) S. State highway projects will be constructed to Caltrans design standards. a 9. Need to explore relationship of Regional Routes to nexus issue. ADUMQSTRATIVE ISSUES 1. RTMP fees are in addition to fees collected at the jurisdictional level for local improvements. 2. Fee may be used to pay for the administration of the fee area and for the planning environmental documentation, design, acquisition of right of way, and construction of projects. 3. Fee to be assessed uniformly in TRANSPAC area for residential (single family,multi-family), commercial, office, industrial, other type of development. Fees to be assessed uniformly within boundary per dwelling unit or per square foot of gross floor area with minor type exceptions (e.g. gas pumps, medial office, etc.) 4. Local jurisdiction authority to be used for fee imposition and collection. Need to determine if a JPA must be established for this purpose. Also need to determine if the CCTA can provide legal services for Central County RTMP (did.provide some for East County). Local jurisdiction ordinances imposing the fee need a statement relative to the project's relationship to that jurisdiction. S. Fees collected to be put in an interest bearing account (local jurisdiction/JPA if one established) to accrue to RTMP. Interest accrued, regardless of account, should be used for administration and all projects uses eligible for fee allocation. 6. Fee Area Boundary - Use CCTA RTPC map. Will need legal definition for RTW area. 7. Phased implementation of fee by type of land use. This issue will need to be addressed when fee amount is known. '4 w Attachment One Fligible Projects from the Central Count Action Plan Bus Replacement Program Paratransit Van Replacement Program Non-Revenue Service Vehicle Replacement Program - 18 Vehicles Management Information System Replacement Program Paratransit Facility Alternative Fueling System Paratransit Automated Dispatching System Expansion Bus Program - 20 Buses Paratransit Van Expansion Program - 16 Vans Fixed Route System Patron / Fleet Security System Bus Shelters at main County Connection stops Information Kiosks (transit info.) at ZS locations (BART stations, Park 'a Ride lots, malls, etc.) Peak period Express Shuttle from Clayton to Concord BART Peak period shuttles from BART stations to residential Park 'n Ride locations Bicycle lockers at BART stations (Concord, WC, PH) Improve lighting/security /information Bicycle lockers at Park 'n Ride lots (8 locations) Bicycle Facilities - Bicycle lockers in 10 public parking lots (Main St., WC and other retail districts Bicycle Facilities - Bicycle lockers at major shopping mall locations (ie. Sun Valley, Willows, Broadway Plaza, etc.) Bicycle Facilities - Separate pedestrian/bicycle lanes over freeways and other large arterials (Ygnacio Rd, Willow Pass, Treat Blvd) S. Fes are ID be collected at the issuance of a building permit, time of occupancy (permit), final map, etc. at the option of the TRANSPAC jurisdiction. 9. If a countywide mitigation program is ever developed, TRANSPAC should request credit against that program. 10. Biennial review of fes. Fe increase should be based on 1) increases in project and 2) increase in construction cost price index. Fe should not increase by more than S% in any given year due to inflation. 11. Developers would be eligible to receive credit on fee for construction/dedications to listed paojerts. 12. May need m consider establishment of local inter jurisdictional credit program (e.g. Oakhurst model). ra X.Ins