Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09261995 - D6 C( l • .' Con ,rlcy(A _ Costa TO. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Courty 4J r FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon count Director of Community Development DATE: September 26, 1995 SUBJECT: Pleasant Hill BART Station Annexation SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS ENDORSE and PROPOSE to the City of Pleasant Hill, the City of Walnut Creek, and the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) a framework for settling annexation issues that uses the concept of marrying immediate completion of a traffic study and a willingness to host traffic mitigation projects to revenue sharing of retail sales tax monies generated in the Pleasant Hill BART Station Redevelopment Project Area. FISCAL IMPACT Current retail sales tax generation in the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area is small. Future sales tax generation is expected and will be determined by the ultimate development pattern. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS A. Summary of Issues The issues surrounding the sphere of influence issue are significant and complex. At its September 6 meeting, LAFCO stated its intent to approve a modification to th sphere of CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: XX YES SIGNATURE: _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR COMME DATION OF B ARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): . ACTION OF BOARD ON September 26, 1995 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_ OTHER X See attached Addendum. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT none ) 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. Contact: Jim Kennedy 646-4076 orig: Redevelopment Agency ATTESTED September 26, 1995 cc: County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF County Counsel Ji THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Community Development AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Public Works City of Pleasant Hill City of Walnut Creek B EPUTY BART Contra Costa Centre Walden Association l f � 1 influence lines to incorporate certain residential areas in the vicinity of the Pleasant Hill BART Station area into Walnut Creek's sphere, but left unresolved the status of the commercial properties. The major issues surrounding this action include: 1. Protection of development rights; 2. Traffic mitigation, and funding thereof; 3. Revenue.sharing; 4. Preservation of the BART property as the "Pleasant Hill Station;" 5. The desire of most of the commercial property owners to seek a sphere change to Walnut Creek; and 6. The desire of the BART Board to remain in the Pleasant Hill sphere. B. Policy and Historical Context The prior Board of Supervisors position on this matter has been consistent with respect to preservation of development rights, and protection of County revenues. The County stands to be the single largest "investor" in the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area by virtue of diversion of property tax revenue from the County General Fund and other County controlled funds to the Redevelopment program. Approximately 40% of all redevelopment revenues are contributed by the County-estimated at $50 million over the life of the Redevelopment Plan. The County's return on investment is expected to be realized, in the short term, by enhanced sales and transient occupancy tax revenues ,and in the longer term by a significantly enhanced property tax base. The Pleasant Hill BART Station is a model of transit based development. The creation of "transit villages" (concentrations of employment and housing within walking distance of public transit)is acknowledged to be wise planning. To undertake this scale of development program requires a carefully constructed framework of land use and infrastructure, and an accommodating real estate market. Conditions in the real estate market have changed significantly since the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan was adopted. The major emphasis of the Plan on office use will likely not be achievable. Alternative uses consistent with the transit based development concept are being proposed, and need to be considered. A critical link in the Pleasant Hill BART Station development program is the mitigation of traffic impacts. Approximately $40 million in improvements are completed today prior to most of the development. Capacity of the Redevelopment Agency to finance another $40 million in improvements can be achieved with build-out. Because most of the proposed traffic mitigation measures are outside of the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area, i.e., within adjacent cities, the issue related to spheres of influence have become linked to cooperation on traffic mitigation. In other words, traffic mitigation has become the currency for resolving the issues in the area. C. Recommended Approach While all parties seem to support the vision contained in the Pleasant Hill BART Specific Plan, that support splinters when the interested parties stake out their positions on the issues. In a very fundamental way, however, resolution of the problem must occur by recognizing that the currency to be used is traffic and traffic mitigation. It is recognized that a new traffic study should be done. The adopted approach of the County, as stated in the Board's action in October of 1994, was to do a limited traffic study that would examine two preferred traffic mitigation measures - Oak Park overcrossing and Buskirk Avenue widening-as well as land use alternatives more consistent with current economic f realities. This approach had merit at the time of adoption, however, nearly a year has passed with no progress on the study due to the impasse on annexation discussions. Due to time considerations, staff is recommending that a comprehensive traffic study suitable for CEQA purposes be initiated. Attachment A describes the full scope of the study, including eight alternative traffic mitigation measures, and the land use alternatives. An outcome of the traffic study would be an identification of the traffic problem, and alternative circulation projects that work to address the problem. Since most of the alternative projects are located entirely or partly in adjacent cities, this study would be done in cooperation with the cities via the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Steering Committee. At completion of the traffic study, the respective jurisdictions would have to take action on the acceptability of the circulation projects in their jurisdiction. Since traffic has become the currency of interest, the results of the traffic study and the acceptability of the projects to the jurisdictions would be married to revenue sharing irrespective of the ultimate sphere of influence boundary. Staff is recommending that the County agree to a revenue sharing arrangement of the sales tax generated in the area, and that the allocation of the sales tax share be determined by whether the city (or cities) is willing to host the identified traffic mitigation measure(s). For example, if the traffic mitigation measures are all in Pleasant Hill, then the revenue sharing arrangement is 100% with Pleasant Hill, irrespective of sphere or ultimate corporate limits. Alternatively, if all traffic mitigation is hosted by Walnut Creek,then 100% of the revenue sharing is with them. If traffic mitigation is hosted by both communities, then a split of the tax sharing between the two would be provided for, with the split determined by a measure related to traffic. If it is determined that no traffic mitigation is required(or not acceptable mitigation measures exist), then no revenue sharing would occur due to this arrangement, rather revenue splits would be determined via the traditional tax sharing agreements that precede annexation. In summary, staff is recommending that the Board of Supervisors propose a framework that would relate traffic impacts and traffic mitigation measures to partial revenue sharing. This approach would include immediate initiation of a comprehensive, CEQA level traffic study, ultimate concurrence on mitigation measures by the host jurisdiction, and revenue sharing thereby resulting. Responsibilities flowing from this framework by the respective public agencies would be: Contra Costa County • Sharing of sales tax revenue; • Initiation/payment for substantial part of traffic study; • Determination as to political acceptability of traffic mitigation measure(s) in the unincorporated County that are found to be operationally feasible. City of Pleasant Hill • Full cooperation on traffic studies; • Good faith and reasonableness in determining the political acceptability of traffic mitigation measures; • Immediate support to maintain funding via the Measure C process for the Pleasant Hill BART access improvements (Oak Park overcrossing, etc.); • Agreement to tax sharing provisions. City of Walnut Creek • Full cooperation on traffic studies; • Good faith and reasonableness in determining the political acceptability of traffic mitigation measures; • Immediate support to maintain funding via the Measure C process for the Pleasant Hill BART access improvements (Oak Park overcrossing, etc.); • Agreement to tax sharing provisions. Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) • Reaffirm the name of the station as the "Pleasant Hill BART Station." JK:Ih sralWphbart.bos a 1 r fi a ATTACHTEIT A BACKGROUND INFORMATION PLEASANT HELL BART STATION AREA TRAFFIC STUDY SCOPE OF TRAFFIC STUDY • the following alternatives will be evaluated in the traffic study: A. widen Buskirk to 4 lanes between Oak Park and Monument B1. Oak Park/North Main vertical realignment B2. Oak Park/North Main horizontal realignment B3. Oak Park/North Main elevated right turn lane C. extend David Drive and/or Minert Road to Coggins Drive D. Wayne Drive flyover from southbound I-680 E. urban diamond interchange at Treat-Geary/North Main • the study will also look at the implications of removing the Southern Pacific alternative from the County General Plan • alternative land use scenarios in the Pleasant Hill Bart Station Area will be evaluated RELATIONSHIP OF TRAFFIC PROJECTS TO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BOUNDARIES (see map) • development of project will need cooperation of city in which it is located Alternatives A and B and SP Arterial are in City of Pleasant Hill Alternatives C, D, and E are in City of Walnut Creek