HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08061996 - D5 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: AUGUST 6, 1996
SUBJECT: Hearing on the Formation of the Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas.
Project No. 0676-6P4070; CDD-CP #96-41
RESOLUTION NO. 96/335
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
I. Recommended Action:
A. It is recommended that the Board take the following actions:
I. ADOPT and APPROVE the Development Program Report pertaining to the
formation of the Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas.
2. DETERMINE that the project isnot subject to the California Environmental
Quality Act pursuant to Article 5, Section 15061(b)(3) CEQA guidelines.
3. DIRECT the Director of Community Development to file the Notice of
Exemption with the County Clerk.
4. DIRECT the Public Works Director to arrange for payment of the $ 25.00
handling fee to the County Clerk for the filing of the Notice of Exemption.
5. DETERMINE that a majority protest does not exist.
6. INCORPORATE in this resolution by reference the boundaries, costs, and
method of fee apportionment set forth in the Development Program Report
and the attached ordinance.
Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE:
_RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
—APPROVE _OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON � J9 916 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED ,/OTHER
The Public Hearing on the above matter was opened,
and no one appearing to speak, the hearing was closed.
VO OF SUPERVISORS
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT )
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
HJB:ML:ds
g:\transengXB06SCCAoB.t8
Orig. Div: Public Works(T/E)
Contact: Martin Lysons,Tel.313-2295
cc: M.Shiu, Deputy PW Director 1 hereby Cal*that e►te h s&W ad axnct of
Community Development a e�' take" and °�� �„�o°0�'in�
County Auditor-Controller AMSTED:
Treasurer-Tax Collector �� �+� Clerk�
supervison
P.W.Accounting
P.W. Design-Environmental
Hearing on the Formation of the Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas
August 6, 1996
Page 2
I. Recommended Action (Cont.)
7. DIRECT the Director of Public Works and Auditor/Controller to
establish the below listed seven trust funds, and that these trust funds
shall now be specific for the SCC Fee Areas, and that the Treasurer
shall continue the investment of said monies with interest to accrue
in the trust fund accounts.
Trust Funds Accounts
Gale Ranch
Dougherty Valley (Shapell Property)
Dougherty Valley (Windemere Property)
SCC Sub-Regional
SCC Regional
Windemere (W-1)
Camino Tassajara (C-2)
8. DIRECT the Public Works Department and Department of Community
Development to review the fee schedule periodically, and to adjust for
the effects of inflation as described in the attached ordinance. The
adjustment for inflation is not subject to CEQA.
9. DIRECT the Director of Community Development to monitor future
amendments to the currently adopted General Plan and their impact
on traffic within the SCC Fee Areas, and to report those amendments
to the Public Works Director as necessary to facilitate updating of the
SCC Fee Areas.
10. DIRECT the Public Works Department and Department of Community
Development to comply with CEQA on development applications and
road projects to be constructed pursuant to the Development Program
Report for the SCC Fee Areas.
B. It is recommended that the Board ADOPT the attached ordinance, which
forms the SCC Fee Areas, and ordains the following:
Traffic Mitigation Fees (,Ordinance No. 96 - 26 )
1 Adopt traffic mitigation fees, as recommended in the
Development Program Report.
2. Adjust the fee schedule every year that the Fee Areas are in
effect, to account for the affects of inflation.
II. Financiallmpact:
None. There is no impact to the General Fund. The SCC Fee Area program fully
funds all projects in the County. The total estimated cost of the road improvement
projects identified in the Program Development Report is approximately $36 million.
The proposed fees collected from development within Dougherty Valley is
approximately$31 million. The proposed fees collected from development outside
of Dougherty Valley is $5 million. In''addition, the SCC Fee areas generate an
additional $11 million for regional improvement projects (1-680). The total estimated
cost of those regional improvement projects is approximately$52 million. Additional
sources of funding will be sought in order to complete the funding of those projects.
DS
Hearing on the Formation of the Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas
August 6, 1996
Page 3
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
On December 22, 1992, pursuant to Resolution 92/867, the Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors approved the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan which
established a framework for a planned community OF 11,000 homes. Also on
December 22, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the
General Plan ("GPA")to allow urban uses in the Dougherty Valley, certified the final
environmental impact report ("EIR"), and as part of the EIR process, adopted
certain "Findings" required under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
and adopted a mitigation monitoring and reporting program ("MMP").
Because of their concerns about impacts from development in the Dougherty
Valley, on January 21, 1993, San Ramon, Danville and the Cities of Walnut Creek
and Pleasanton (collectively the "Petitioner Cities") and certain non-governmental
organizations including Alamo Improvement Association, Sierra Club, Greenbelt
Alliance, Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee, Save Our Hills and Mount Diablo
Audubon Association (collectively"Petitioner Non-Governmental Organizations" or
"Petitioner NGOs") initiated litigation against the County and the Dougherty Valley
Developers, asking the court to set aside the County's December 22, 1992
approvals of the GPA and the Specific Plan, certification of the EIR and adoption
of the Findings and the MMP. This litigation ("Lawsuit") is entitled Town of
Danville, et. al. V. County of Contra Costa et. al., Case No. C 93-00231 (Contra
Costa County Superior Court).
Consistent with the requirements of CEQA, a conference to discuss the settlement
of the Lawsuit was noticed by the County and held on March 3, 1993. Thereafter,
commencing on July 19, 1993, representatives of the County, the Petitioner Cities
and the Dougherty Valley Developers have met frequently to establish means by
which certain concerns expressed by the Petitioner Cities with respect to
development within Dougherty Valley can be addressed. These discussions have
resulted in an agreement ("Settlement Agreement") between the County, San
Ramon, Danville and the Dougherty Valley Developers on certain principles to
govern development in the Dougherty Valley and a process and certain actions by
which those principles will be implemented.
The Settlement Agreement formalized many of the processes through which
development within Dougherty Valley will be governed. The SCC Fee Areas
program is one such process as it establishes a series of fees to finance the
improvements called for in the Settlement Agreement that are necessary to mitigate
the impacts of development within Dougherty Valley.
In addition, in 1988, the voters of Contra Costa County passed Measure C, which
required Local Agencies to assess a fee on development to fund regional
improvements. Besides the Dougherty Valley Fee and SCC Sub-Regional Fee, the
SCC JEPA also establishes a fee program to finance regional road improvement
projects, estimated to collect in excess of$11 million dollars dedicated solely for
regional improvements on 1-680 in Contra Costa County.
IV. Consequences of Negative Action:
Failure to form the SCC Fee Areas will preclude the County from complying with the
provisions of the Settlement Agreement and Measure C.
HJB:ML:ds
gAranseng\B06SCCAoB.T8
Eu Ar R �E�
Recording Requested By:
k,>
Contra costa County 96 1.5275 : AUG 15 1996
Return To: ATJ(� O'CLOCK4/ - M.
CON7`RA COSTA COUNTY RECORDS
Board of Supervisors STEPHEN L. WEIR
651 Pine St., Room 106 r-OUNTY RECORDER
Martinez, CA 94553 FEEa O F F 9
Document Title(s)
ORDINANCE NO. 96-26
SOURTHFRN CONTRA COSTA FEE AREAS
Ordinance No. 96
Southern Contra Costa Fee Areas
(SCC Regional, SCC Sub-Regional and Dougherty Valley Fee Areas)
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County ordains as follows:
SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance provides for the formation of the Southern
Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas(SCC Regional, SCC Sub-Regional, and Dougherty Valley
Fee Areas), and the adoption of fees to be collected from developments proposed in the
Fee Areas located in unincorporated Contra Costa County to fund road improvements.
SECTION II. AUTHORITY. This ordinance is enacted, in part, pursuant to Government
Code Section 66484 and Division 913, Title 9, of the Contra Costa County Ordinance
Code.
SECTION 111. NOTICE AND HEARING. This ordinance was adopted pursuant to the
procedure set forth in Government Code Sections 54986, 65091, 66016, 66017 and
66484, and Division 913, Title 9, of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code, and all
required notices have been properly given and public hearings held.
SECTION IV. FEE ADOPTION. The following fees to fund road improvements are
adopted for the SCC Fee Areas as established by Resolution 96/335 dated August 6,
1996 and shall apply to all development as shown in Table 1 below and continued on the
next page. Fees shall be collected when building permits are issued in accordance with
Section 913-4.204 of Title 9 (Subdivisions) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code.
TABLE 1
SCC Sub-Regional Fee
Land Use Recommended Fee
Single Family Residential $2,128 per dwelling unit
Commercial $2.13 per square foot gross floor area
Office $3.41 per square foot gross floor area
Other $2,128 per peak hour trip
Dougherty Valley Fee (Shapell Property)
Land Use Recommended Fee
Residential $3,146 per dwelling unit
Commercial $2.21 per square foot gross floor area
• • p.5
Dougherty Valley Fee (Windemere Property)
Land Use Phase Recommended Fee
Multi Family Residential One $2,959 per dwelling unit
Single Family Residential One $3,459 per dwelling unit
Residential Two $4,009 per dwelling unit
Residential Three and Four $4,209 per dwelling unit
Commercial $2.21 per square foot gross floor area
SCC Regional Fee
Land Use Recommended Fee ,
Single Family Residential $792 per dwelling unit
Commercial $0.79 per square foot gross floor area
Office $1.27 per square foot gross floor area
Other $792 per peak hour trip
SECTION V. FEE AREA The fee areas shall include all of the unincorporated area within
the SCC Fee Areas with the following exceptions:
For the SCC Regional Fee Area:
1. Areas in the Tassajara JEPA Fee Area
2. Subdivision 7796, Country Club at Gale Ranch
For the SCC Sub-Regional Fee Area:
1. Any development required under conditions of approval to construct certain
off-site road improvements in lieu of fee payment.
2. Areas in the Tassajara JEPA Fee Area
3. Areas in the Dougherty Valley Fee Area
For the Dougherty Valley Fee Area (Shapell Property)
1. Subdivision 7796, Country Club at Gale Ranch
The boundaries of the SCC Fee Areas are established by Resolution No. 96/335
adopted August 6, 1996. Attached to this ordinance are the following Exhibits describing
those boundaries: Exhibit A, SCC Regional Fee Area; Exhibit B, SCC Sub-Regional Fee
Area; Exhibit C, Dougherty Valley Fee Area (Shapell Property); and Exhibit D, Dougherty
Valley Fee Area (Windemere Property).
SECTION VI. SENIOR HOUSING. Nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to
abridge or modify the Board's discretion, upon proper application for senior housing or
congregate care facilities pursuant to Government Code Section 65915, to adjust or waive
the fees provided for within this ordinance.
P.5
SECTION VII. PURPOSE AND USE OF FEES. The purpose of the fees described in this
ordinance is to generate funds to finance improvements to certain major thoroughfares in
the Southern Contra Costa area. The fees will be used to finance the road improvements
listed in the Development Program Report. As discussed in more detail in the Report,
there is a reasonable relationship between the fees and the types of development projects
that are subject to the fees in that the development projects will generate additional traffic
on the major thoroughfares in the Southern Contra Costa area, thus creating a need to
expand, extend or improve the existing major thoroughfares and a need to construct new
major thoroughfares to mitigate adverse traffic and infrastructure impacts that would
otherwise result from such development projects.
SECTION VIII. SEVERABILITY. If any fee or provision of this ordinance is held invalid
or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, that holding shall not affect the
validity or enforceability of the remaining fees or provisions, and the Board declares that
it would have adopted each part of this ordinance irrespective of the validity of any other
part.
SECTION IX. REVIEW OF FEES. While the SCC Fee Areas are in effect, the project cost
estimates shall be reviewed periodically. The fee schedule shall be adjusted on March 1
by the change in the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index for the San
Francisco Bay Area for the period ending December 31 of the preceding calendar year.
SECTION X. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall become effective 60 days after
passage, and within 15 days of passage, shall be published once with the names of the
Supervisors voting for and against it in the San Ramon Valley Contra Costa Times, a
newspaper of general circulation published in this County. Pursuant to Section 913-6.026
of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code, the Clerk of the Board shall promptly file a
certified copy of this ordinance with the County Recorder.
PASSED and ADOPTED on August 6, 1996 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Smith
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
Attest: Phil Batchelor, Clerk of
the Board of Supervisors and County /
Administrator
By:
. Deputy Bo r
9:ftnsenq%scc ord.v
Attachments
A • PS
Boundary Description
SCC JEPA Regional Fee Area
EXHIBIT "A"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, bounded on the south by Alameda
County, bounded on the north by the"South Walnut Creek Area of Benefit"adopted December 6,
1994, by Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors' Resolution 94/604, and bounded on the north
and west by the"Central County Area of Benefit"adopted June 13, 1995, by Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors' Resolution 95/273 described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the west line of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian with the boundary common to Contra Costa and Alameda Counties;thence
from the Point of Beginning, along said County boundary in a general westerly direction 101,550
feet, more or less, to Rancho comer P.C. No. 31 on the boundary of Rancho Laguna de los Palos
Colorados; thence along said Rancho boundary, north 1902845" east 3,547.16 feet to Rancho
Comer P.C. No. 32 and north 1°13'26" east 929.81 feet to the boundary of the Record of Survey
filed June 20, 1980, in Book 67 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 9;thence along the boundary
of said Record of Survey as follows: 1) north 88052'39" east 513.17 feet, 2) north 0°15'16"west
1,303.04 feet, 3) north 88°43'10"east 1,290.34 feet, and 4) north 0°27'37"west 1,306.53 feet to
the northwest corner of Section 28, Township 1 South, Range 2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the north lines of Sections 28, 27 and 26 (T1S, R2W), easterly 15,840 feet, more or
less, to the west line of Section 25 (T1 S, R2W); thence along said west line, southerly 2,640 feet,
more or less, to the west quarter comer of said Section 25; thence south 88°43'05"east 1,063.84
feet to the northwest comer of Subdivision MS 28-82 filed November 21, 1983, in Book 108 of
Parcel Maps at page 11;thence along the north line of Subdivision MS 28-82, south 88°47'23"east
1,062.06 feet to the northwest comer of Subdivision MS 53-81 filed March 28, 1985, in Book 115
of Parcel Maps at page 14; thence along the north line of Subdivision MS 53-81, south 88043'43"
east 3,035.66 feet to the east line of said Section 25 (T1 S, R2W); thence along said east line,
northerly 2,640 feet, more or less, to the northeast comer of Section 25, said point lying on the
southerly boundary of the parcel of land described as PARCEL FIVE in the deed to East Bay
Regional Park District recorded April 4, 1974, in Book 7189 of Official Records at page 183;thence
along said boundary, in a general northerly direction 2,325.7 feet to the east line of the Parcel of
land described as PARCEL ONE in the deed to the United States of America recorded July 29,
1980, in Book 9930 of Official Records at page 913; thence along said east line, in a general
northwesterly direction 192.27 feet to an angle point on the boundary of said East Bay Regional
Park District PARCEL FIVE (7189 O.R. 183); thence along said boundary, in a general
northwesterly direction 1207.59 feet to the northeast comer thereof, said point being the southeast
comer of the parcel of land described as PARCEL TWO in said deed to the East Bay Regional Park
District (7189 O.R. 183); thence along the northeast line of PARCEL TWO (7189 O.R. 183), said
line also being the boundary of Rancho San Ramon, northwesterly 4,840 feet, more or less, to the
most easterly comer of Subdivision MS 150-75 filed June 14, 1976, in Book 45 of Parcel Maps at
page 41; thence along the boundary of said Subdivision MS 150-75 as follows: 1) south 63°16'
west 193.73 feet, 2) south 76018'50"west 481.39 feet, 3) north 84°17' west 2,622.91 feet, and 4)
north 0039'40"west 1,233.72 feet to the northwest comer of said Subdivision MS 150-75, said point
1
lying on the south line of Subdivision 6419 filed July 28, 1988, in Book 323 of Maps at page 39;
thence along said south line, north 84°4744"west 1,353.46 feet to the southwest corner of said
Subdivision 6419, said point lying on the centerline of Section 14, Township 1 South, Range 2
West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along said centerline of Section 14 and the centerline of
Section 11 (T1 S, R2W), northerly 6,663.66 feet to the southwest comer of the parcel of land
described in the deed to David L. Gates, et ux, recorded April 9, 1981, in Book 10275 of Official
Records at page 438;thence along the south line of said Gates parcel (10275 O.R. 438) easterly
300 feet to the most southeast comer thereof, said point lying on the boundary of Subdivision MS
58-75 recorded October 26, 1978, in Book 71 of Parcel Maps at page 23; thence along the
boundary of said Subdivision MS 58-75 (71 PM 23)as follows: 1) north 87°05'11"east 274.17 feet,
2) in a general northerly direction 3,354.5 feet to the northeast comer thereof, 3) north 8901212"
west 176.01 feet, and 4) south 0°36' west 41.92 feet to the southeast comer of Subdivision MS
133-72 filed September 7, 1972, in Book 24 of Parcel Maps at page 9; thence along the south line
of Subdivision MS 133-72, south 89°12'36"west 259.78 feet to the Centerline of Castle Hill Ranch
Road (a private road); thence along said centerline in a general northerly direction, 907 feet,�more
or less to the northeast comer of Lot"B"as shown on the Record of Survey filed May 13, 1984, in
Book 74 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 12, said point being the most southern comer of the
said"South Walnut Creek Area of Benefit"(Res. 94/604);thence along the boundary of said"South
Walnut Creek Area of Benefit," in a general northerly and easterly direction, 6,275 feet, more or
less, to the most eastern comer thereof, said point being the intersection of the centerline of Crest
Avenue with the extended west right of way line of South Main Street; thence along said extension
and west right of way line in a general southerly direction 565 feet, more or less, to the southeast
corner of Subdivision MS 114-75 filed October 20, 1976 in Book 49 of Parcel Maps at page 19;
thence along the arc of a non-tangent curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 1,096 feet
on the northwest line of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way, northeasterly 52 feet, more or
less, to the most western comer of Assessor Parcel Number(hereinafter referred to as APN) 183-
093-031 described as PARCEL THIRTY-ONE in the deed to Contra Costa County recorded
December 9, 1985 in Book 12652 of Official Records at page 570; thence non-tangent along the
southwest line thereof, crossing Engineer's Station 603+65, southeasterly 110 feet, more or less,
to the southeast line of said County parcel, being a non tangent curve concave to the northwest
having a radius of 1,196 feet and being concentric with said northwest line; thence along the arc
of said curve, northeasterly 52 feet, more or less, to the southwest line of APN 183-093-023
described in the deed to East Bay Municipal Utility District (hereinafter referred to as EBMUD)
recorded January 5, 1968 in Book 5530 of Official Records at page 93; thence- along said
southwest fine,south 22°53'01"east 33.76 feet;thence crossing Rudgear Road, southeasterly 245
feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of APN 187-040-007 described as PARCEL 11 in the
deed to Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District recorded December
20, 1967 in Book 5520 of Official Records at page 451; thence along the boundary of PARCEL 11,
in a general southeasterly direction 1,036.02 feet and north 64"16'18"east 239.65 feet, to the most
eastern comer thereof on the west right of way line of Interstate Freeway 680; thence along said
west line in a general southeasterly direction 836 feet, more or less, to the boundary of APN 187-
050-011 and 012 described as Parcel 1 in the deed to Edward Johannessen and Juliet
Johannessen 1987 Revocable Living Trust recorded March 22, 1988 in Book 14228 of Official
Records at page 211; thence along said boundary as follows: 1) south 63°37'38" west 44.33 feet,
2) south 23°15'36" east 359.22 feet, 3) north 64003'39" east 14.72 feet, 4) south 23015'36" east
144.57 feet, 5) south 45021'24" west 36.15 feet, 6) south 55°15'24" west 108.21 feet, 7) south
32°31'24" west 152.34 feet, 8) south 12004'24" west 20.34 feet, 9) south 33009'41" east 465.15
2
• w D.6
feet, 10) north 35°52'50" east 129.8 feet, 11) south 29°21'32" east 64.96 feet, and 12) south
69°09'52"east 54.67 feet, to the most southeastern comer thereof on the west right of way line of
Interstate Freeway 680; thence along said west line in a general southeasterly direction 1,209.59
feet; thence crossing said freeway, north 53047'20" east 290 feet, more or less, to the east right
of way line thereof; thence along said east line in a general southeasterly direction 2,259.08 feet
to the west line of Subdivision 6468 recorded January 8, 1982 in Book 286 of Maps at page 41;
thence along said west line in a general northerly direction 828.77 feet to the south line of APN
187-160-013 described as Parcel Three in the deed to the City of Walnut Creek recorded July 5,
1984 in Book 11867 of Official Records at page 965; thence along said south line and the south
line of Subdivision 4810 filed September 23, 1976 in Book 189 of Maps at page 48, south
8943'18"east 944.73 feet, to the southwest comer of Subdivision 3037 recorded June 25, 1964
in Book 99 of Maps at page 30; thence along lot lines of Subdivision 3037, south 89°43'18" east
933.43 feet, south 6019'31"east 712.51 feet and along the north right of way line of Livoma Road,
north 72°23'20"east 145.74 feet;thence crossing Trotter Way, north 72023'20"east 100 feet, more
or less,to the south line of Lot 131 (99 M 30);thence continuing along lot lines of Subdivision 3037
as follows: 1) along the north right of way line of Livoma Road, north 72023'20"east 272.09 feet,
2) north 1°36'23" east 275.72 feet, 3) south 88°23'37" east 149.23 feet 4) south 1°36'23" west
223.71 feet, and 5) along the north right of way line of Livoma Road in a general easterly direction
79.27 feet, to the east boundary of Subdivision 3037; thence along said boundary in a general
northerly direction 1,532.28 feet to the northeast corner thereof, also being the southeast comer
of Subdivision 3827 recorded June 11, 1969 in Book 126 of Maps at page 38; thence along the
east line of Subdivision 3827, north 1 031'55"east 942.5 feet,to the southwest comer of Subdivision
5366 recorded March 25, 1980 in Book 236 of Maps at page 7; thence along the boundary of
Subdivision 5366 in a general easterly direction 400.83 feet to the southeast comer thereof on the
boundary of Subdivision 5931 recorded June 29, 1983 in Book 271 of Maps at page 21; thence
along the boundary of Subdivision 5931, in a general southeasterly direction 105.63 feet along
Livoma Heights Road right of way line and south 5502255"east 537 feet, to the southeast corner
of Subdivision 5931 on the west line of Subdivision 4402 recorded December 27, 1974 in Book 175
of Maps at page 25; thence along said west line, south 1032'10"west 1063.35 feet to the northwest
comer of Subdivision 3973 recorded August 18, 1972 in Book 149 of Maps at page 20; thence
along the west line of Subdivision 3973 and its souther prolongation, south 1 032'10"west 967.1
feet, to the centerline of Livoma Road; thence along said centerline in a general easterly direction
890.41 feet to the southern prolongation of the east line of Subdivision 3973; thence along said
prolongation and east line, north 1 044'25"east 1,057.06 feet,to the southeast comer of Subdivision
4402 (175 M 25); thence continuing north 1°44'25" east 1,527.78 feet to the northeast comer of
Subdivision 4402 on the boundary of Subdivision 4924 recorded May 18, 1977 in Book 196 of
Maps at page 28; thence along said boundary in a general southeasterly direction 2,879.25 feet
to the southeast comer thereof on the boundary of Subdivision 6743 filed June 9, 1987 in Book 313
of Maps at page 28; thence along said boundary, north 21053'15" west 3,423.26 feet, north
73°16'01"east 4,566.44 feet, and south 13051'48"east 5,687.22 feet, to the most southern comer
thereof on the south line of Rancho San Miguel and the Record of Survey filed August 27, 1970
in Book 53 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 13; thence along said south line, south 76053'13"
east 1,445.41 feet, to the most southern corner of said Record of Survey (53 LSM 13) on the
boundary of that 787.58 acre parcel shown on the Record of Survey filed June 22, 1960, in Book
18 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 39; thence along the boundary of said parcel (18 LSM 39),
south 600$'40"east 2,389.28 feet and north 87052'06" east 9,881.20 feet to the southeast corner
thereof on the northwest line of Lot D, Rancho San Miguel Robert Allen Tract; thence along said
3
northwest line, northeasterly 3,100 feet, more or less, to the centerline of Mount Diablo Scenic
Boulevard (North Gate Road); thence along said centerline in a general easterly direction 12,400
feet, more or less, to the centerline intersection of Summit Road; thence along the centerline of
Mount Diablo Scenic Boulevard (South Gate Road)in a general southerly direction 6,700 feet, more
or less, to the south line of Section 12 Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along said south line, easterly 4,400 feet, to the northwest corner of Section 18, Township
1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;thence along the west line of said Section 18 (T1 S,
R1 E) southerly 5,280 feet, more or less, to the southwest comer thereof; thence along the south
line of Sections 18, 17 and 16,Township 1 South, kange 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, easterly
15,840 feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of Section 22, Township 1 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian, thence along the west line of said Section 22 (T1 S, R1 E), southerly 5,280
feet, more or less, to the southwest comer thereof, thence along the south line of Sections 22 and
23(T1 S, R1 E),easterly 10,560 feet, more or less,to the northeast comer of Section 26(T1 S, R1 E);
thence, along the east line of Sections 26 and 35 (T1 S, R1 E), southerly 10,560 feet, more or less
to the northeast comer of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the east line of Sections 2 and 11 (T2S, R1 E), southerly 10,560 feet, more or less,
to the northeast comer of Section 14, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the north line of said Section 14, (US, R1 E),westerly 2,640 feet, more or less, to the
northeast comer of Parcel "D° of Subdivision MS 80-85 filed May 14, 1987, in Book 127 of Parcel
Maps at page 32; thence along the east line of said Parcel "D" and its southerly prolongation,
southerly 6,250 feet, more or less, to a point on the said boundary common to Contra Costa and
Alameda Counties; thence along said County boundary in a general westerly direction 2,800 feet,
more or less, to the Point of Beginning.
JH:jlg
g:lclericanexhibitslsouthem.ccc
6/19/96
4
3
Boundary Description
SCC JEPA Sub-Regional Fee Area
EXHIBIT "B"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, described as follows:
References to maps, boundary Fines, and ownerships are to records of said County.
Beginning at the intersection of the west line of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian with the boundary common to Contra Costa and Alameda Counties; thence
from the Point of Beginning, along said County boundary in a general westerly direction 85,500
feet, more or less, to the intersection with the west line of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range
2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the west line of Sections 35, 26 and 23 (T1 S, R2W)
northerly 10,646 feet, more or less, to the west quarter comer of said Section 23 (T1 Sy R2W);
thence along the mid-section line of Sections 23 and 24 easterly 10,060 feet, more or less, to the
northeast comer of PARCEL FIVE described in the deed to East Bay Regional Park District
(hereinafter referred to as EBRPD) recorded April 4, 1974, in Book 7189 of Official Records at
page 183; thence along the easterly boundary of said PARCEL FIVE in a general southeasterly
direction 9,218.70 feet to the northeast comer of PARCEL ONE described in the deed to the United
States of America recorded July 29, 1980, in Book 9930 of Official Records at page 913; thence
along said east line in a general southeasterly direction 192.27 feet to an angle point on the
boundary of said PARCEL FIVE (7189 O.R. 183); thence along said boundary in a general
southerly direction 2,325.7 feet to the northeast comer of Section 25, Township 1 South, Range
2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the east line of said Section 25(T1 S, R2W) southerly
4,442 feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of Parcel "D" of Subdivision MS 301-77 filed May
24, 1978, in Book 66 of Parcel Maps at page 15; thence, along the north boundary of said
Subdivision MS 301-77, south 89°58'27"east 3,009.88 feet to a point on the boundary of Parcel
"A" of Subdivision MS 853-91 filed April 28, 1995, in Book 166 of Parcel Maps at page 28; thence
along the boundary of Subdivision MS 893-91 the following courses: 1) south 24033'00" east
150.23 feet, 2) south 59042'00" west 136.11 feet, 3) north 32038'30" west 6.36 feet, 4) south
53°39'00"west 27.09 feet, 5) south 32°08'00"east 28.00 feet, 6) north 56°20'30"east 27.29 feet,
7) north 32038'30"west 18.88 feet, 8) north 59042'00"east 135.55 feet, 9) south 24°30'00" east
23.58 feet, 10) south 36°3908"east 66.53 feet, 11) south 89c'12'02"east 2,076.95 feet, 12) north
9044'32"east 207.43 feet to the most eastern comer of Parcel 'D' of said Subdivision, said point
being the most southern comer of Parcel"D" of Subdivision MS 167-79 filed September 17, 1981,
in Book 97 of Parcel Maps at page 35; thence, along the boundary of said Parcel "D" (97 PM 35),
north 9°44'32" east 200.27 feet; thence north 48°50'52" east 100.00 feet; thence, leaving the
boundary of said Parcel"D", north 48°50'52"east 117.98 feet; thence north 64000'25"east 317.08
feet to the southwest comer of Lot 10 of Subdivision 3457 filed September 23, 1965, in Book 107
of Maps at page 30; thence southerly 672.69 feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of Parcel
A of Subdivision 6098 filed May 11, 1984, in Book 279 of Maps at page 3; thence along the west
line of said Parcel A southerly 823.34 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the west boundary
line of the Rancho San Ramon; thence, southerly, along the west line of Section 32, Township 1
South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, 2,040 feet, more or less, to the West one quarter
comer of said Section 32 (T1 S, R1 W); thence, along the center of said Section 32 and its easterly
prolongation, in a general easterly direction, 3,750 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of
Lot 8 of Subdivision 3280 filed October 14, 1965, in Book 107 of Maps at page 43; thence, along
1
the south line of said Subdivision 3280 (107 M 43), in a general easterly direction, 380.89 feet to
the southwest comer of Lot 15 of Subdivision 2990 filed May 23, 1962, in Book 87 of Maps at page
27; thence, along the south line of said Subdivision 2990(87 M 27), in a general easterly direction,
344.09 feet to the southwest comer of Subdivision 5312 filed September 26, 1978, in Book 217 of
maps at page 23; thence along the south line of said Subdivision 5312 (217 M 23), and its easterly
prolongation, in a general easterly direction, 400 feet, more or less, to the control line of Interstate
Highway 680; thence, along said control line of Interstate Highway 680, in a general northerly
direction 5,604 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the westerly prolongation of the north line
of Subdivision 4771 filed May 13, 1976, in Book 184 of Maps at page 21; thence along said
westerly prolongation and north line of Subdivision 4771, south 89000'57"east 352 feet, more or
less, to the northwest comer of Lot 22 of Subdivision 3325 filed August 25, 1964, in Book 100 of
Maps at page 37; thence along the north line of said Subdivision 3325 south 89000'57" east 903.64
feet to the northeast comer of said Subdivision 3325; thence continuing in a general easterly
direction, along the prolongation of the north line of said Subdivision 3325 (100 M 37) 462 feet,
more or less, to the northwest comer of Lot 28 of Subdivision 4841 filed November 8, 1976, in Book
191 of Maps at page 16; thence along the north line of said Subdivision 4841 in a general easterly
direction 1,152.20 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Lot 38 of Subdivision 3572 filed
July 27, 1966, in Book 112 of maps at page 12; thence along the north boundary of said
Subdivision 3572 in a general northeasterly direction 2,674.66 feet, more or less, to the northwest
comer of Lot 58 of said Subdivision 3572 (112 M 12), said point being the southwest comer of Lot
53 of Subdivision 3714 filed August 6, 1969, in Book 127 of Maps at page 34; thence along the
west line of Lots 53 and 52 and the northerly prolongation thereof north 7015'12"west 255.08 feet
to the intersection with the monument line of Thornhill Road as shown on said map (127 M 34);
thence along said monument line of Thornhill Road south 71004'58" east 157.21 feet to the
intersection with the monument line of Old Orchard Drive as shown on said map(127 M 34); thence
along said monument line of Old Orchard Drive north 6000'00" west 175.85 feet and north
10°02'55"east 148.10 feet to the intersection with the monument line of Camino Tassajara Road
as shown on said map (127 M 34); thence along said monument line of Camino Tassajara Road
south 79057'05" east 407.58 feet to a standard county monument; thence from said monument
continuing along the monument line of Camino Tassajara Road, along the arc of a tangent curve,
concave to the south, having a radius of 1,000.00 feet, through a central angle of 2012'18", a
distance of 38.48 feet to the intersection with the southerly prolongation of the east line of Lot 65
of Subdivision 6751 filed November 21, 1986, in Book 309 of Maps at page 16; thence along last
said line, north 1703632"east 64.63 feet to the southeast comer of said Lot 65 (309 M 16); thence,
along the east line of Lots 65, 66, 67, 68 and 69 of said Subdivision 6751(309 M 16),'in a general
northerly direction 568.83 feet to the northeast comer of said Lot 69 (309 M 16), said point lying
on the boundary of Parcel "H" of Subdivision 6516 filed November 21, 1986, in Book 309 of Maps
at page 8; thence along the boundary of said Parcel "H" north 84°52'20"west 127.64 feet; thence
north 12°30'07" east 170.57 feet to a point on the boundary of Parcel "K-1" shown on said map
(309 M 16); thence along the boundary of said Parcel "K-1", north 77029'53" west 14.00 feet;
thence north 12030'07" east 513.55 feet to the northwest comer of Subdivision 6516 (309 M 16);
thence along the northerly boundary of Subdivision 6516 in a general easterly direction 4,297.81
feet to the northeast corner thereof, said point being the south one-quarter corner of Section 22,
Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence continuing easterly along the
south line of said Section 22 (T1 S, R1 W), 2,633.40 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of
said Section 22, said point being the northwest corner of Parcel "J" of Subdivision 7058 filed
October 10, 1989, in Book 338 of Maps at page 19; thence along the west line of said Parcel "J°
southerly 2,666.16 feet to the southwest comer of said Parcel"J"; thence along the south boundary
2
• D, 5
of said Subdivision 7058 (338 M 19) in a general easterly direction 5,847.38 feet, more or less, to
the southeast comer of said Subdivision 7058, said point being the west one-quarter corner of
Section 25, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, said point also being the
southwest comer of Lot 48 of Subdivision 5024 tiled July 12, 1978 in Book 214 of Maps at page
8; thence along the south line of said Subdivision 5024 easterly 1,290.35 feet to the southeast
comer thereof, said point being the southwest comer of Parcel "A" of Subdivision 5437 filed July
26, 1979, in Book 227 of Maps at page 1; thence along the southerly line of said Parcel °A" and
its easterly prolongation, easterly 2,152.42 feet to a railroad spike on the monument line of
Blackhawk Road as shown on said map(214 M 8); thence along said monument line of Blackhawk
Road, in a general northwesterly direction 4,181.97 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the
southwesterly prolongation of the northwest line of Parcel "C° of Subdivision 5438 filed August 14,
1979, in Book 228 of Maps at page 11; thence along said southwesterly prolongation and
northwest line of Parcel "C" north 35030'00" east 1,448.36 feet; thence, continuing along the
boundary of said Parcel"C" (228 M 11), the following courses: 1)south 71 30'00"east 137.22 feet,
2)north 1 000'00"east 250.00 feet, 3) south 68000'00"east 581.79 feet 4) east 1,277.80 feet to the
northeast comer of said Parcel"C" (228 M 11), said point being the southeast comer of the parcel
of land shown on the Record of Survey RS 2119 filed March 16, 1995, in Book 107 of Licensed
Surveyors' Maps at page 25; thence along the east line of said parcel (107 LSM 25) north 0°00'33"
east 549.72 feet to a point on the southerly line of Parcel "A" of Subdivision MS 174-76 filed April
28,.1977, in Book 54 of Parcel Maps at page 30; thence, along the southerly line of said Parcel "A"
south 89°53'11"west 1,305.04 feet to the southwest comer of said Parcel "A"; thence along the
west line of said Parcel"A" north 002903"east 3,295.71 feet to a point on the south line of Section
13, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the south line of said
Section 13(T1 S, R1 W) easterly 2,681.87 feet to the southwest comer of Section 18, Township 1
South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the south line of Sections 18, 17 and
16, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, easterly 15,840 feet, more or less
to the northwest comer of Section 22, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the west line of said Section 22 (T1 S, R1 E), southerly 5,280 feet, more or less, to the
southwest comer thereof; thence along the south line of Sections 22 and 23, Township 1 South,
Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, easterly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northeast comer
of Section 26, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence, along the east line
of Sections 26 and 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, southerly 10,560
feet, more or less, to the northeast comer of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount
Diablo Meridian; thence along the east line of Sections 2 and 11,Township 2 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian, southerly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northeast comer of Section 14,
Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the north line of said
Section 14 (T2S, R1 E), westerly 2,640 feet, more or less, to the northeast comer of Parcel "D" of
Subdivision MS 80-85 filed May 14, 1987, in Book 127 of Parcel Maps at page 32; thence along
the east line of said Parcel 'D" and its southerly prolongation, southerly 6,250 feet, more or less,
to a point on the said boundary common to Contra Costa and Alameda counties; thence, along said
County boundary in a general westerly direction 2,800 feet, more or less, to the Point of Beginning.
JH.jlg
gAcledca Ilexhibitslsccjepa.ex
6/18/96
3
Boundary Description
Dougherty Valley- Shapell
EXHIBIT "C'°
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, described as follows:
References to maps, boundary lines and ownerships are to records of said County.
Beginning at the northwest comer of Parcel B of Subdivision MS 331-77 filed October 6, 1978, in
Book 70 of Parcel Maps at page 46; thence, along the west line of said Subdivision MS 331-77,
southerly 531.68 feet, more or less,to the northwest comer of Parcel A of Subdivision MS 142-78
filed August 14, 1979, in Book 80 of Parcel Maps at page 8; thence, along the west line of
Subdivision MS 142-78, southerly 523 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel A of
Subdivision MS 32-89 filed August 24, 1990, in Book 148 of Parcel Maps at page 20; thence along
the west line of Subdivision MS 32-89 southerly 213.00 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner
of Parcel A of Subdivision MS 317-77 filed January 12, 1979, in Book 73 of Parcel Maps at page
30; thence along the west line of said Parcel A(73 PM 30), southerly 397.00 feet, more or less, to
the northwest comer of Parcel B of Subdivision MS 57-78 filed October 5, 1978, in Book 70 of
Parcel Maps at page 44; thence, along the west line of said Parcel B (70 PM 44), southerly 370.00
feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel A of Subdivision MS 144-90 filed August 23,
1995,in Book 167 of Parcel Maps at page 15; thence, along the west line of Subdivision MS 144-
90, southerly 612.36 feet to the southwest corner thereof, said point lying on the south line of
Section 6, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence, along said south line
of Section 6, easterly 660.98 feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of the 2,319.730 acre
parcel of land shown on the Record of Survey filed February 25, 1981, in Book 68 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 20; thence along the west boundary of said 2,319.730 acre parcel (68
LSM 20), in a general southerly direction 15,193.80 feet, more or less, to a point on the northern
line of the parcel of land described in the Final Judgement to the United States of America, Case
No. 22352, recorded August 2, 1947, in Book 1104 of Official Records at page 377; thence, along
said northern line(1104 O.R. 377), in a westerly direction, 3,175 feet, more or less,to the centerline
of Dougherty Road; thence along said centerline, in a general southerly direction 742 feet, more
or less,to the intersection with the easterly prolongation of the north line of Subdivision 7413 filed
October 30, 1992, in Book 364 of Maps at page 14; thence, along said easterly prolongation and
north line of Subdivision 7413 (364 M 14), north 77'04'00"west 722.50 feet to the northwest corner
thereof,said point being the northeast corner of Subdivision 7038 filed December 27, 1990, in Book
354 of Maps at page 28; thence along the northerly boundary of said Subdivision 7038, north
77004'57"west 514.20 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of the parcel of land described
in the deed to East Bay Municipal Utility District recorded May 19, 1978, in Book 8845 of Official
Records at page 149; thence along the exterior of said East Bay Municipal Utility District Parcel
(8845 O.R. 149) the following courses: 1) north 43009'35" west 1,180.00 feet, 2) north 54013'44"
west 490.00 feet, 3) south 47033'50"west 380.00 feet and 4) south 10013'51" east 582.74 feet to
the southwest corner thereof, said point lying on the northerly boundary of said Subdivision 7038
(354 M 28); thence along said northerly boundary north 77004'57" west 370.00 feet, more or less,
1
to the most northern corner thereof, and point being the most northern corner of Parcel B of
Subdivision MS No. 184-67 filed December 7, 1967, in Book 2 of Parcel Maps at page 16; thence
along the northwesterly line of said Parcel B (2 PM 16) south 64°32'00"west 297.00 feet to a point
on the south line of the parcel of land described in the deed to Pacific Gas and Electric Company
recorded August 15, 1958, in Book 3211 of Official Records at page 565; thence leaving said line,
north 26°26'25"west 1,118.69 feet, more or less,to the southeast corner of Parcel A of Subdivision
5599 filed October 16, 1980, in Book 246 of Maps at page 27; thence, along the east line of said
Parcel A (246 M 27), in a general northwesterly direction, 2,245.83 feet, more or less, to the
southeast corner of Parcel A of Subdivision 5902 filed June 5, 1985, in Book 291 of Maps at page
1; thence, along the east line of said Parcel A (290 M 1), in a general northwesterly direction,
2,255.86 feet, more or less, to the southeast comer of Parcel F of Subdivision 6547 filed June 27,
1985, in Book 290 of Maps at page 1; thence, along the east line of said Subdivision 6547 (291 M
1), in a general northwesterly direction, 1,836.01 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of
Parcel C of Subdivision 6546 filed July 25, 1985 in Book 292 of Maps at page 1; thence, along the
east line of said Parcel C (292 M 1), in a general northwesterly direction, 2,668.99 feet, more or
less, to the southeast comer of Parcel J of Subdivision 6595 filed March 14, 1986, in Book 299 of
Maps at page 47; thence along the east line of said Subdivision 6595 (299 M 47), in a general
northwesterly direction, 3,650.65 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of Parcel JJ of
Subdivision 6550 filed November 6, 1986, in Book 308 of Maps at page 30; thence, along the
exterior boundary of said Subdivision 6550 (308 M 30) the following courses: 1) north 72008'23"
east 1,042.80 feet, 2) south 87026'36" east 284.71 feet to the southwest corner of Parcel B of
Subdivision 6549 filed April 28, 1986, in Book 301 of Maps at page 48; thence, along the exterior
boundary of said Subdivision 6549(301 M 48), south 88°42'18"east 2,630.10 feet to the southwest
comer of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the
west line of said Section 1 (T2S, R1 W) northerly 660.34 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner
of Parcel J of Subdivision 7010 filed September 6, 1989, in Book 336 of Maps at page 46; thence,
along the south boundary of said Subdivision 7010 (336 M 46) in a general easterly direction,
7,850.36 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner thereof; thence, along the east boundary of
said Subdivision 7010, in a general northerly direction, 2,048.20 feet to the northeast corner
thereof, said point lying on the south line of Parcel C of Subdivision 6736 filed February 21, 1989,
in Book 330 of Maps at page 42; thence, along the south line of said Parcel C in a general easterly
direction, 787.16 feet, more or less,to the southwest comer of Subdivision 6017 filed February 22,
1983, in Book 268 of Maps at page 14; thence, along the south line of said Subdivision 6017 in a
general easterly direction, 1,293.68 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of said-Parcel B of
Subdivision MS 331-77 (70 PM 46), the Point of Beginning
JH:jlg
g Adedcal\exhibits\Waily.ex
6/19/96
2
Boundary Description
Dougherty Valley-Windemere
EXHIBIT "D"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, being a portion of Lots 4, 6, 17, 24, 25,
26, 27, 29, 30, 37 and all of Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 28 and 38 as shown on the map entitled
'Map of the Property of the Estate of Elizabeth A. Dougherty" filed in Book C of Maps at page 63,
records of said County, described as follows:
All of the 2,319.730 acre parcel of land shown on the Record of Survey filed February 25, 1981,
in Book 68 of Licensed Surveyors'Maps at page 20, records of said County.
JH jlg
gAclericallexhibits\Dohty.val
6/17/96
1
m �n C Zr mn�O -� - 2 (nCD CD co OZ C)o
Cc Q1 [1 c=
c H.
C o o 3 m z ''-------
-, 0 O ao Z(D 5* O
w � Z m�N fD rr, 9 -�
i3- IM C).. (na M nnn
(A CDD C' cp mm C)� � f�D LD1 000
CL C7 moo
Q Q. N p
C7' D to cj)
Z W c -..I
—1. c I
• �m < mm D m
SD c �37 rm m O m
n
_ (D 0 ��r 2 N DZN C y^fir
W O m C7yy mma R z x0U)
N a m fD �O I-� m T m O m Cn o D
M w o q m o °J Z 0
0 � a mix cyr (p� � 2 MO cocci) 1 � 0umi
D gid N r -n :o0vZm < wovm
c CD �Qc C n0 m D c'c D
N A -.
z
Sr, cm
i
N• m '� m
P�CD c rt 0 'D Z zz
O o 7 C v
b m M
c rn
D s %
Qi T y C2 C
un Fn
0
� 0
C) c Z
Dc -I D� 0U1 a T
D� D mm vc
o=, X O m D co �o
zz M� r m
v r ao Cl) 0 41 v m v r n
M 0 m m CJ Tn Z
D m� cD O Z m
Z r m = c o ri O
M a m Z O Z
Zv o O
v
c a
D _0 Wm 41
M O m �m 7� G m
M m --qG a
►O-n rt v co
aW ,,,f,/�� W� o-, v a�
(D tri F�,, < I S O n 00 m y n
1
r Z
+ = LJ
4 4. i
M .� z
03
O� m O
�o y m z
cn
C
.a CT)
O
ADOPTED BY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ON August 6, 1996
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
FOR THE
SOUTHERN CONTRA COSTA FEE AREAS
PROVIDING FUNDING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF
MAJOR THOROUGHFARE IMPROVEMENTS
IN THE SOUTHERN CONTRA COSTA AREA
PREPARED PURSUANT TO SECTION 913
COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
PUBLIC WORKS AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTS
IN COOPERATION WITH THE TOWN OF DANVILLE AND CITY OF SAN RAMON
August 6, 1996
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
FOR THE SOUTHERN CONTRA COSTA FEE AREAS
PURSUANT TO THE BRIDGE CROSSING AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARES
FEE AREA POLICY
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The Southern Contra Costa ("SCC") Fee Areas are development programs designed to
improve the capacity and safety of the arterial and regional road network in Southern
Contra Costa County through the establishment of a series of traffic mitigation fee
ordinances. The SCC Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement ("JEPA") is between Contra
Costa County("County"), the Town of Danville ("Town") and the City of San Ramon ("City")
and is an agreement concerning the collection and distribution of these fees. This
development program report details the basis for the collection of these fees in the County.
The ordinances apply to the unincorporated areas of Southern Contra Costa County, and
is required of all new development. Similar ordinances will or already have been adopted
by the Town and City. This Development Program Report is required by the Board of
Supervisors Policy on Bridge Crossings and Major Thoroughfare Fees (adopted July 17,
1979)which implements Division 913 of the County Ordinance Code and Section 66484
of the State Subdivision Map Act.
One of the objectives of the County General Plan is to relate new development directly to
the provision of community facilities necessary to serve that development. In other words,
development cannot be allowed to occur unless the funding for the infrastructure
necessary to serve that development is assured. The SCC Fee Areas are a means of
providing funds to construct road improvements necessary to mitigate the traffic impact
generated by potential new development. Requiring all new development pay a road
improvement fee will ensure that they participate in the cost of improving the road system
in Southern Contra Costa County. This report discusses the basis of the traffic mitigation
fees, which are dependent on several factors. These factors are the estimated total cost
of the road improvements, the estimated development potential, and the estimated amount
of responsibility each type of development has for the construction of the improvements.
BACKGROUND
On December 22, 1992, pursuant to Resolution 92/867, the Contra Costa County Board
of Supervisors approved the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan which established a
framework for a planned community including 11,000 homes. Also on December 22, 1992,
the Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the General Plan ("GPA") to allow
urban uses in the Dougherty Valley, certified the final environmental impact report ("EIR"),
and as part of the EIR review process, adopted certain "Findings" required under the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and adopted a mitigation monitoring and
reporting program ("MMP").
2
y P ,5
Because of their concerns about impacts from development in Dougherty Valley, on
January 21, 1993, the City, Town and the Cities of Walnut Creek and Pleasanton
(collectively the"Petitioner Cities") and certain non-governmental organizations including
Alamo Improvement Association, Sierra Club, Greenbelt Alliance, Preserve Area
Ridgelands Committee, Save Our Hills and Mount Diablo Audubon Association initiated
litigation against the County and the Dougherty Valley Developers, asking the court to set
aside the County's December 22, 1992 approvals of the GPA and the Specific Plan,
certification of the EIR and adoption of the Findings and the MMP. This litigation
("Lawsuit") is entitled Town of Danville, et. al. V. County of Contra Costa et. al.. Case No.
C 93-00231 (Contra Costa County Superior Court).
Consistent with the requirements of CEQA, a conference to discuss the settlement of the
Lawsuit was noticed by the County and held on March 3, 1993. Thereafter, commencing
on July 19, 1993, representatives of the County, the Petitioner Cities and the Dougherty
Valley Developers have met frequently to establish means by which certain concerns
expressed by the Petitioner Cities with respect to development within Dougherty Valley can
be addressed. These discussions have resulted in an agreement ("Settlement
Agreement") between the Town, City, County, and the Dougherty Valley Developers on
certain principles to govern development in Dougherty Valley.
The Settlement Agreement called for several processes through which development within
Dougherty Valley would be governed and the impact of such development would be
mitigated. The SCC JEPA establishes one such process, a traffic mitigation fee program
to finance road improvements identified in the Settlement Agreement as necessary to
mitigate the traffic impact created by development within Dougherty Valley. The Dougherty
Valley Fee is one component of the SCC Fees and is assessed to all development that
occurs in Dougherty Valley. The total cost of the projects identified in the Settlement
Agreement is approximately $36 million. The fair share (as determined by the South
County Traffic Study Year 2010 Traffic Impacts for Additional Land Use Alternatives
("South County Traffic Study")) attributable to development within Dougherty Valley is
approximately $31 million. The manner in which these costs were calculated and the
distribution of the cost between the two Dougherty Valley developers, Shapell Industries
of Northern California ("Shappell") and Windemere Ranch Partners ("Windemere"), are
detailed later in this report.
The remaining unfunded cost of the projects identified in the Settlement Agreement is
approximately $5 million. Besides identifying the project cost share attributable to
development in Dougherty Valley, the South County Traffic Study also identified the
responsibility for new development in the area outside of Dougherty Valley. This share of
the funding responsibility, along with the estimates of development potential in the area
(regions within the County, Town, and City) determine the SCC Sub-Regional Fee, another
component of the SCC Fees. The manner in which these costs were calculated and the
distribution of the project responsibility between the Town, City, and County are discussed
later in this report.
3
P-6
In addition, in 1988, the voters of Contra Costa County passed Measure C, which required
Local Agencies to assess a fee on development to fund regional improvements. In 1987,
the County, Town, and City entered into the Tassajara JEPA to collect fees (totaling in
excess of $15 million) on new development to fund both local and regional road
improvements. The final component of the SCC Fees, the SCC Regional Fee is estimated
to collect in excess of$11. million dedicated solely to 1-680 improvements in Contra Costa
County. The Tri-Valley Transportation Committee (MC) is meeting to develop a
Regional Fee covering a much larger area, including portions of Alameda County. If and
when the MC Regional Fee is adopted, the SCC Regional Fee would be incorporated
into or revised to work in conjunction with the MC Regional Fee.
FEE AREAS - LOCATION
Figure 1 shows the general location of the SCC Fee Areas within Contra Costa County.
FEE AREAS - BOUNDARY
The Dougherty Valley, SCC Regional, and SCC Sub-Regional Fee Areas' boundaries are
shown in Figures 2, 3 and 4 and described in Appendices B, C, D, and E.
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 66001 (a) OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE
1) PURPOSE OF THE FEE
The purpose of these Fee Areas are to generate monies through the adoption of a
series of traffic mitigation fees to ensure a roadway network consistent with current
and future transportation needs. By adoption of these fees, the proposed road
improvement system will be able to keep pace with new growth.
2) USE OF THE FEES
The fees will be used to pay for the road improvements described in Appendix A.
3) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT
The road improvement projects for which the fees will be used are necessary for the
improvement of the safety and capacity of the road network serving Southern
Contra Costa County, as determined by future growth allowed for in the General
Plan and its amendments. The road network is outlined in the General Plan under
the Circulation Element.
4
4) RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEED FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENTS AND TYPE OF
DEVELOPMENT
A peak trip generation factor has been associated for each type of development
outlined in this program report. These factors are industry standards obtained from
the Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 5th Edition. The
proposed fee is based on distributing the cost of the road improvement program to
new development in proportion to the number of peak hour trips generated by the
particular type of development and the impact of those trips on the road network.
All new development will be required to pay a fee to fund the necessary road
improvements.
GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP
The basis for the SCC Fees are derived from the features of the County General Plan and
its amendments, and subscribes to the policies of the General Plan elements. The Contra
Costa County General Plan and its various elements are available for review at the
Community Development Department, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,
Martinez, during office hours.
ROAD NETWORK CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
The road network improvement program was developed from the mitigation list identified
in the Settlement Agreement as C-1, C-2 and C-3 Projects. The road improvements will
be funded and constructed in conjunction with the development of property within the SCC
Fee Areas. These road capacity improvement projects will be reviewed periodically to
assess the impacts of: changing travel patterns; additional phases of development both
within Dougherty Valley and outside of Dougherty Valley; the rate of development; and the
adequacy of the estimated project costs. The SCC Fees may then be updated as needed.
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL WITHIN THE AREA OF BENEFIT
The development potential for the SCC Fee Areas was estimated from resources provided
by the County, Town and City using adopted General Plans and amendments and other
available resources. It is estimated that within the SCC Sub-Regional Fee Area there is
a potential for approximately 1,750 (Town-250, City-870, and County-630) new single
family residential units. It is estimated that within the Dougherty Valley Fee Area there is
a potential for 8,500 new single family residential units. It is estimated that within the SCC
Regional Fee Area there is a potential for more than 13,000 new single family residential
units. There are also approximately 168,500 square feet of commercial and 80,000 square
feet of office development potential identified in the SCC Sub-Regional Fee Area; 300,000
square feet of commercial development potential in the Dougherty Valley Fee Area; and
935,000 of commercial and 319,875 square feet of office development potential in the SCC
Regional Fee Area.
5
0 D. 5
ESTIMATED COST OF ROADWAY NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS
The estimated roadway improvement costs shown in Appendix A include construction, right
of way, engineering, incidentals and contingencies. An administrative charge of 1% of the
estimated project costs has been assessed as part of each SCC Fee. This includes the
estimated staff time for fee collection, accounting, and transfer of funds to the other
jurisdictions. The total estimated project cost of the SCC Fee Areas for local and regional
road improvement projects is approximately$47 million. Fees collected from development
within Dougherty Valley will exceed $37 million.
BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT
The concept of an Area of Benefit is the equitable distribution of road improvement costs
to new development from which future traffic impacts will arise. As traffic impacts are
directly related to the total number of vehicles on the road network, we are able to relate
development road fees to the number of vehicle trips associated with a particular category
of development.
Road improvement projects identified to mitigate the impact of the Initial Level of
Development of 8,500 units were termed the "Initial Project Traffic Improvements" (C-1
projects). The Dougherty Valley Developers (Shapell and Windemere) will construct
and/or pay the cost of construction of any needed Initial Project Traffic Improvement.
Traffic improvements in addition to the C-1 projects are necessary to accommodate the
Initial Level of Development. Such"Additional Project Traffic Improvements" (C-2 projects)
have associated pro rata shares which the Dougherty Valley Developers are responsible
for. The South County Traffic Study was used to determine the Dougherty Valley
Developers' pro rata shares for the C-2 projects.
The Dougherty Valley Developers' pro-rata share of the construction cost of each C-2
project is listed in Appendix A. Additionally, a construction mitigation project list (C-3
projects)was developed to mitigate the impacts of Dougherty Valley construction traffic on
facilities within the Town of Danville. As part of the Settlement Agreement, the Dougherty
Valley Developers agreed to pay $200 a residential unit toward the funding of.the C-3
projects. In regards to the C-1 projects, Shapell and Windemere agree that certain
projects are a shared responsibility ("C-1 Shared"), while other projects are 100% the
responsibility of Shapell ("S-1 projects") or 100% the responsibility of Windemere ("W-1
projects"). In regards to the C-2 and C-3 projects, it was agreed that the funding of these
projects would be a shared responsibility. The total Dougherty Valley Developer
responsibility for the S-1, W-1, C-1 Shared, pro-rata share of C-2, and share of C-3 project
funding is $30,690,202
The SCC Sub-Regional Fee is based on: total project cost; development allowed in the
region by the General Plans of the three jurisdictions; and the "fair share" allocated to that
development outside of Dougherty Valley as identified by the South County Traffic Study.
The projects identified on the C-3 list in the Settlement Agreement mitigate the impact of
6
Dougherty Valley construction traffic on roadway facilities in the Town of Danville. Since
it cannot be assumed that there would be a similar impact from construction traffic created
by development outside of Dougherty Valley, the SCC Sub-Regional Fee collected within
the City and County does not fund the construction of the C-3 projects. The Town, City,
and County have agreed that the need for the C-2 projects to accommodate traffic
generated by development within the Town is significantly less than that of development
in either the City or County.
Therefore, although a uniform Sub-Regional Fee will be collected in the Town, City and
County, the distribution of fees collected within the Town will be as follows: Town 75% (C-3
projects); City 16% (C-2 projects); and County 9% (C-2 project). The estimated revenue
for the construction of the C-2 projects from development within the Town is $130,000 and
for the C-3 projects is$399,000. In addition, the Town, City, and County have agreed that
since there are some projects both on the Tassajara JEPA project List and the SCC JEPA
Project List, a portion of the Tassajara JEPA fees will be applied to projects on the SCC
Sub-Regional Project List. This amounts to approximately $180,000 from fees that have
already been collected and an additional $550,000 from future fee collections. The
combined contribution from the Town and the Tassajara JEPA toward the SCC Sub-
Regional C-2 project funding is approximately $860,000. The total revenue from all
sources for the pro-rata share of the C-2 and share of C-3 project funding is $5,031,576.
The two categories of land use for which a fee will be assessed in the unincorporated
portion of the SCC Fee Area, are: single family residential and"other." The total estimated
project costs are divided by the sum of the peak hour trips generated by each category.
In the residential categories, the cost is equally distributed among all dwelling units. In the
current County General Plan, the only development potential identified in this region of
unincorporated Contra Costa Countyis single family residential. If, for whatever reason,
another type of development is permitted, it would be required to pay for its fair share of
the fee area improvements. This type of development would fall under the "other" category
and the traffic mitigation fee would be based on the number of peak hour trips generated
by that proposed of development. A traffic report prepared by a licensed engineer would
be required to analyze the project's impact during the peak traffic hours. The project would
then be charged the peak hour trip rate for the SCC Fee Area, multiplied by the_number
of peak hour trips identified in the traffic report.
GALE RANCH FEES
In 1995, the first phase of Shapell's development in Dougherty Valley ("Country Club at
Gale Ranch") was approved. Prior to the approval of the Gale Ranch subdivision
development, the County and Shapell agreed that a fee schedule specifically and only for
Gale Ranch would be adopted in order for the development to proceed in a timely and
predictable fashion. The following is a summary of the revenue generated by the traffic
mitigation fees for the 1,216 dwelling units in the Country Club at Gale Ranch
development:
7
�1
San Ramon $2,358,028 D.V. Projects + $36,000 for Signal at Alcosta/Montevideo
Danville $ 351,424 D.V. Projects
County $ 589,760 D.V. Projects
County $ 729,600 Regional
County $ 246,848 Dougherty Road Interim Improvements
Other $ 297,920 Dublin
TOTAL $4,573,580
As detailed in the next section of this report, these Gale Ranch Fees (D.V. Projects,
totaling $3,263,212) were used in the fee calculations for the remaining 7,234 units
allowed for in Initial Level of Development in Dougherty Valley.
CALCULATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF SCC FEES
SCC SUB REGIONAL FEE CALCULATION
C-2 Project Funding Needs $4,632,576
Tassaiara JEPA/Danville Development - $ 864,900
Sub Total $3,767,676
1% Administration + $ 37,677
Balance $3,805,353
Land Use Units of Peak Peak % Trips Cost Share Local Fee
Square Hour Hour
Feet Factor Trips
Single ' 1,491 1.0 1,491 83.4% $3,173,256 $2,128
Family
Commercial t 168,500 0.0010 169 9.5% $359,678 $2.13
Office 80,000 0.0016 128 7.2% $272,419 $3.41
TOTAL 1,768 100% $3,805,353
SCC SUB REGIONAL FEE DISTRIBUTION
Residential Fees Collected/Building Permit Issued in:
San Ramon Danville County
San Ramon receives $1,359 $404 $1,338
Danville receives = $1,596
County receives $769 $128 $790
$2,128 $2,128 $2,128
8
All the identified Commercial and Office development In the SCC Sub-Regional Fee Area
are located in the City. The following fee distributions of the SCC Sub-Regional
Commercial and Office Fees include the 1% the City is to withhold to cover the costs of fee
collection and quarterly disbursement.
SCC Sub-Regional Commercial Fee:
City Receives: $1.36 per square foot gross floor area
County Receives: $0.77 per square foot gross floor area
TOTAL Fee: $2.13 per square foot gross floor area
SCC Sub-Regional Office Fee:
City Receives: $2.17 per square foot gross floor area
County Receives: $1.24 per square foot gross floor area
TOTAL Fee: $3.41 per square foot gross floor area
DOUGHERTY VALLEY FEE CALCULATION
Dougherty Valley Revenue Breakdown: Shared Responsibility: $16,587,487
100% Shapell (S-1): $ 3,045,753
100% Windemere (W-1) $ 7,793,750
Gale Ranch Fees: $ 3,263,212
TOTAL: $30,690,202
Shared Responsibility: $16,587,487
1% Administration $ 165,875
TOTAL $16,753,362
Land Use Units of Peak Peak % Trips Cost Share Local Fee
Square Hour Hour
Feet Factor Trips
Single 7,284 1.0 7,284 96.0% $16,090,649 $2,209
Family
Commercial 300,000 0.0010 300 4.0% $662,713 $2.21
TOTAL 7,584 100% $16,753,362
DOUGHERTY VALLEY COMMERCIAL FEE DISTRIBUTION
For traffic mitigation fees collected from commercial development within Dougherty Valley,
the fees shall be distributed as follows:
City shall receive $1.57 per square foot gross floor area
Town shall receive $0.28 per square foot gross floor area
County shall receive $0.36 per square foot gross floor area
TOTAL Commercial Fee $2.21 per square foot gross floor area
9
D.
2) DEVELOPER SPECIFIC DOUGHERTY VALLEY FEES (Shapell)
Shapell S-1 Projects $3,045,753
1% Administration $ 30,458
Total $3,076,211
S-1 per unit Fee $ 937
Total Shapell Residential Fee $ 3,146
Dougherty Valley Residential Fee Distribution (Shapell Property)
San Ramon receives: $2,600
Danville receives $ 267
County receives 279
TOTAL FEE $3,146
3 ) DEVELOPER SPECIFIC DOUGHERTY VALLEY FEES (Windemere)
Dougherty Valley Residential Fee/Distribution
Phased (Windemere Property)
Phase and Land Use W-1 Fee TOTAL County Danville San Ramon
Phase 1 Multi Family $ 750 $2,959 $1,022 $267 $1,670
Phase 1 Single Family $1,250 $3,459 $1,522 $267 $1,670
Phase 2 Residential $1,800 $4,009 $2,072 $267 $1,670
Phase 3 and 4 Residential $2,000 $4,209 $2,272 $267 $1,670
Total Revenue from Windemere (W-1) Phased Fee = $7,793,750
4) JURISDICTIONAL SHARE OF FEES COLLECTED
Aggregate total of all fees (Dougherty Valley and SCC Sub-Regional Fees) and associated
distributions listed above,
City shall receive: $21.22 million
Town shall receive: $ 2.78 million
County shall receive: $11.99 million
5 SCC REGIONAL FEE
Land Use Units of Peak Peak % Trips Cost Share Local Fee
Square Hour Hour
Feet Factor Trips
Single 13,298 1.0 13,298 90.2% $10,529,815 $792
Family
Commercial 935,000 0.0010 935 6.3% $740,365 $0.79
Office 319,875 0.0016 512 3.5% $405,419 $1.27
TOTAL 14,745 100% $11,675,599
10
0
D,,6
RECOMMENDED FEES
SCC Sub-Regional Fee
Land Use Recommended Fee
Single Family Residential $2,128 per dwelling unit
Commercial $2.13 per square foot gross floor area
Office $3.41 per square foot gross floor area
Other $2,128 per peak hour trip
Dougherty Valle Fee Sha ell Property)
Land Use Recommended Fee
Residential $3,146 per dwelling unit
Dougherty Valley Fee (Windemere Property)
Land Use Phase Recommended Fee
Multi-Family Residential One $2,959`per dwelling unit
Single Family Residential One $3,459 per dwelling unit
Residential Two $4,009 per dwelling unit
Residential Three and Four $4,209 per dwelling unit
Dougherty Valley Commercial Fee: $2.21 per square foot gross floor area
SCC Regional Fee
Land Use Recommended Fee
Single Family Residential $792 per dwelling unit
Commercial $0.79 per square foot gross floor area
Office $1.27 per square foot gross floor area
Other $792 per peak hour trip
11
REVIEW OF FEES
Project cost estimates will be reviewed every year that the SCC Fee Areas are in effect.
The fee schedule shall be adjusted on March 1 by the amount of change in the
Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco Bay Area for the
period ending December 31 of the preceding calendar year.
COLLECTION OF FEES
Fees shall be collected when a building permit is issued in accordance with Section 913-
4.204 of Title 9 (Subdivisions) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. Fees
collected will be deposited in interest-bearing accounts established by the Board of
Supervisors by Resolution 96- , adopted on August 6, 1996.
INTEREST ON FEES
The interest accrued on the fees collected in the SCC Fee Areas, shall continue to
accumulate in the trust accounts and shall be used for the purpose of administration,
design and construction of the fee area improvements.
REIMBURSEMENT
A development may be required to construct a portion of the road improvements identified
in Appendix A. In such a case the developer may be eligible to receive reimbursement.
The developer should contact the Public Works Department prior to the commencement
of construction and follow the guidelines set forth in the "Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement Pertaining to Southern Contra Costa Fees for Traffic Mitigation."
HB/MUds
g:\transeng\SCC RpU7
Attachments
12
• J :
f- z
q r
Od
1-7
Or
� v i dti�
I a t .
ti
OK
ula a
� q
s
Y•6
13 M
cr
o
cc
t Lei
low
cro
co
#
.�
'"` .S!." _ a ` t'.•. j` ills '�. •«. ;}4 �,.( f e 7,"; •..✓- s :i„+ 1
'. .ter--; �, (•` • �'-:w•,.-> ,::+.4a ;•�.
LLJ
LLJ
,.;
cr LE
q «.Y } _ } of .,..._- J `� - /Jf `•
-�, S �2~ .r(-11aryJ i —' J �/•� 1' } [♦ Lir-U'+ ,--"—°,'_"
'� } i.,_ a''�... _ z .:= -•'I r=-�-! �' '- /'tel'.✓,l = j
� .6
0 �
PM
!
cc
COS
v� cG C
cosl sA� Poo ...........
Soot
90 - 4A vs alti V144fY1
CP
OIL
eoullow
1p&
�a� 'i;• _ �'Y,.-,�.. a. ter""'.
00/ rte. I'1~ •�' r« "�ftI I � ` `,� 14 .t_'�- �d �
rY 4 fir+ 4�5{ v ott p 16,
SIX
Y
�t�
.y. w
� w
•
y:
w
t�..,tl�:�•��j{ �� _ /'�. �•:+ts:Itis•:�s�.�Y'R.v':�_♦ li''�: _
Will
NN
,. ••t, `.irC� �•• ��Y� •�/+s♦j•`�i��+�f!•I'✓oa •••f:b•' S�i•�d'
v. t .,t�+;•�ya�s1`.•s IL-L%
�i:'- ,�9�,(L.�'�Srs f'-• :•+� .'.#�y:.;c;..
�I�r--•►i•�✓���":t'� - .rte f 1.![ {1� 1.•yNt••• :w'5��..:��
S p '#'o�i i•\•:" ,MI► 2 t•t*1 :2d♦' °y'3 vi,•:a"s"s'
�.:�'�►• ' '+bram
a.•q.�.r - •i -
.�'��� y�:. a {:�r�t'� ,'•y„*a ll���moi•„ '�.'_�W� 4:
to
wlt,�d,^Fn•��•^y��. r�G�a� .i�6'i£:�•'��A�.�;.+1��„Y• W
�+ �:'� y-. .!7 ?•,•.fir. ^Y: '.�.::••-.. 9 ,C,•�'•1:%:Je' •)•'
'� 't��w FJ ./.[�:r•L=•ir ,rC..'j.S '+ a.A ct..''�gi
vs'C•• ai'�.mi ! �•%� s
�iP�;��P L�,9t gs�+Ef:�+'•d�� '��i,��y '3S<'es'�%r-.t•,��y
y�. d '�9�"�."�, ,st ••NMS + •.� �
1
� f
•
•
•
w
w •
APPENDIX A
SOUTHERN CONTRA COSTA JEPA
DOUGHERTY VALLEY AND SUB-REGIONAL PROJECT LISTS
Project Dougherty Valley Sub-Regional
No. Description "Share" S-1 "Share" W-1 "Share" "Share"
1.1 Camino Tassajara/ $672,431
Blackhawk Road
1.2 1-680/Sycamore Valley $5,000
Road
1.3 Crow Canyon Road/ $300,736
Dougherty Road
1.4 Bollinger Canyon Road $56,674
/Camino Ramon
1.5 Bollinger Canyon Road $207,041 $1,430,539
/Alcosta Boulevard
1.6 Dougherty Road $404,568
1.7 Windemere Parkway $7,793,750
1.8 Windemere Parkway/ SEE C-1.7
Camino Tassajara
1.9 Crow Canyon Road $237,252
1.10 Crow Canyon Road $5,328,366 $672,658
1.11 Dougherty Road $2,066,039
1.12 Dougherty Road $2,297,757
1.13 Dougherty Road/Old SEE C-1.11
Ranch Road
1.14 Alcosta Boulevard/Old $330,949
Ranch Road
15
• 0 D-6
Project Dougherty Valley Sub-Regional
No. Description, "Share" S-1 "Share" W-1 "Share" "Share"
2.1 Bollinger Canyon Road $2,015,518 $417,214
2.2 Camino Tassajara $2,473,677 $1,479,779
2.3 Camino Tassajara/ SEE C-3.5
Sycamore Valley Road
2.4 Crow Canyon Road $2,264,280 $1,253,321
2.5 Bollinger Canyon Road $26,503 $88,327
Alcosta Boulevard/ DELETED
2.6 Crow Canyon Road
2.7 Alcosta Boulevard/ $73,760 $786,918
Crow Canyon Road
2.8 Camino Ramon/Crow $115,303 $230,019
Canyon Road
2.9 Crow Canyon Road/ $69,871 $116,451
1-680 NB off-ramp
2.10 Crow Canyon Road/ $41,563 $31,176
1-680 SB ramps
2.11 Bollinger Canyon Road $105,967 $229,371
/Sunset Road
TOTALS $18,150,699 $3,045,753 $7,793,750 $4,632,576
SUMMARY OF SHARED C-1 AND C-2 PROJECT COSTS
Outside
San Ramon Danville County Dougherty Valley
C-1 $10,286,826 $ 677,431 - -
C-2 $ 4.712.765 $2,473.677 $4.632.576
TOTAL $14,999,591 $ 677,431 $2,473,677 $4,632,576
"Shared"C-1,C-2 Projects San Ramon County
San Ramon $14,999591 "Shared"C-1,C-2 $14,999,591 $ 2,473,677
Danville $ 677,431 S-1 $ 3,045,753 -
County $ 2,473,677 W-1 - $ 7.793.750
TOTAL $18,150,699 TOTAL $18,045,344 $10,267,427
16
Settlement Agreement C-3 Projects
Project
No. Description Dougherty Valley"Share" Danville"Share"
3.1 Camino Tassajara Overlay $799,480 $596,409
3.2 Crow Canyon Road Overlay $172,420 $128,625
3.3 Sycamore Valley Road Overlay $392,977 $293,159
3.4 Crow Canyon Sound wall $334,265 $249,360
3.5 Camino Tassajara/Sycamore Valley $859 $641
Road
TOTALS(C-3) $1,700,000 $1,268,195
Danville
C-1 $ 677,431
CC3 $1.700.000
TOTAL $2,377,431
San Ramon Share (C-1,C-2,S-1) $18,045,345
Danville Share(C-1,C-3) $ 2,377,431
County Share(C-2,W-1) $10,267.427
TOTAL DOUGHERTY VALLEY FEES $30,690,202(local road improvements identified in the
Settlement Agreement)
OTHER DEVELOPERS (outside of Dougherty Valley)
C-2 $4,632,576
C-3 399,000
TOTAL $5,031,576
Regional Fee Project List
Description SCC JEPA"Share" Total Project Cost
1-680 Auxiliary Lanes from Bollinger Canyon $8,500,000 $37,000,000
Road to Diablo Road
1-680/Alcosta Boulevard $2,260,000 $11,300,000
1-680/Stone Valley Road $800,000 $4,000,000
TOTALS $11,560,000 $52,300,000
17
r 0 D.5
Boundary Description
SCC JEPA Regional Fee Area
APPENDIX "B"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, bounded on the south by Alameda
County, bounded on the north by the "South Walnut Creek Area of Benefit" adopted December 6,
1994, by Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors' Resolution 94/604, and bounded on the north
and west by the "Central County Area of Benefit" adopted June 13, 1995, by Contra Costa County
Board of Supervisors' Resolution 95/273 described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the west line of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian with the boundary common to Contra Costa and Alameda Counties; thence
from the Point of Beginning, along said County boundary in a general westerly direction 101,550
feet, more or less, to Rancho corner P.C. No. 31 on the boundary of Rancho Laguna de los Palos
Colorados; thence along said Rancho boundary, north 19028'45" east 3,547.16 feet to Rancho
Corner P.C. No. 32 and north 1013'26" east 929.81 feet to the boundary of the Record of Survey
filed June 20, 1980, in Book 67 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 9; thence along the boundary
of said Record of Survey as follows: 1) north 88°52'39" east 513.17 feet, 2) north 0°15'16" west
1,303.04 feet, 3) north 88043'10" east 1,290.34 feet, and 4) north 002737" west 1,306.53 feet to
the northwest corner of Section 28, Township 1 South, Range 2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the north lines of Sections 28, 27 and 26 (T1 S, R2W), easterly 15,840 feet, more or
less, to the west line of Section 25 (T1 S, R2W); thence along said west line, southerly 2,640 feet,
more or less, to the west quarter corner of said Section 25; thence south 88043'05" east 1,063.84
feet to the northwest corner of Subdivision MS 28-82 filed November 21, 1983, in Book 108 of
Parcel Maps at page 11; thence along the north line of Subdivision MS 28-82, south 88°47'23"east
1,062.06 feet to the northwest corner of Subdivision MS 53-81 filed March 28, 1985, in Book 115
of Parcel Maps at page 14; thence along the north line of Subdivision MS 53-81, south 88043'43"
east 3,035.66 feet to the east line of said Section 25 (T1 S, R2W); thence along said east line,
northerly 2,640 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of Section 25, said point lying on the
southerly boundary of the parcel of land described as PARCEL FIVE in the deed to East Bay
Regional Park District recorded April 4, 1974, in Book 7189 of Official Records at page-183; thence
along said boundary, in a general northerly direction 2,325.7 feet to the east line of the Parcel of
land described as PARCEL ONE in the deed to the United States of America recorded July 29,
1980, in Book 9930 of Official Records at page 913; thence along said east line, in a general
northwesterly direction 192.27 feet to an angle point on the boundary of said East Bay Regional
Park District PARCEL FIVE (7189 O.R. 183); thence along said boundary, in a general
northwesterly direction 1207.59 feet to the northeast corner thereof, said point being the southeast
corner of the parcel.of land described as PARCEL TWO in said deed to the East Bay Regional Park
District (7189 O.R. 183); thence along the northeast line of PARCEL TWO (7189,0.R. 183), said
line also being the boundary of Rancho San Ramon, northwesterly 4,840 feet, more or less, to the
most easterly corner of Subdivision MS 150-75 filed June 14, 1976, in Book 45 of Parcel Maps at
page 41; thence along the boundary of said Subdivision MS 150-75 as follows: 1) south 63016'
west 193.73 feet, 2) south 76°18'50" west 481.39 feet, 3) north 84°17' west 2,622.91 feet, and 4)
north 0039'40"west 1,233.72 feet to the northwest corner of said Subdivision MS 150-75, said point
1
• • �.5
lying on the south line of Subdivision 6419 filed July 28, 1988, in Book 323 of Maps at page 39;
thence along said south line, north 84°47'44" west 1,353.46 feet to the southwest corner of said
Subdivision 6419, said point lying on the centerline of Section 14, Township 1 South, Range 2
West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along said centerline of Section 14 and the centerline of
Section 11 (T1 S, R2W), northerly 6,663.66 feet to the southwest corner of the parcel of land
described in the deed to David L. Gates, et ux, recorded April 9, 1981, in Book 10275 of Official
Records at page 438; thence along the south line of said Gates parcel (10275 0.R. 438) easterly
300 feet to the most southeast corner thereof, said point lying on the boundary of Subdivision MS
58-75 recorded October 26, 1978, in Book 71 of Parcel Maps at page 23; thence along the
boundary of said Subdivision MS 58-75 (71 PM 23) as follows: 1) north 87°05'11" east 274.17 feet,
2) in a general northerly direction 3,354.5 feet to the northeast corner thereof, 3) north 89012'12"
west 176.01 feet, and 4) south 0°36' west 41.92 feet to the southeast corner of Subdivision MS
133-72 filed September 7, 1972, in Book 24 of Parcel Maps at page 9; thence along the south line
of Subdivision MS 133-72, south 89012'36"west 259.78 feet to the Centerline of Castle Hill Ranch
Road (a private road); thence along said centerline in a general northerly direction, 907 feet, more
or less to the northeast corner of Lot"B" as shown on the Record of Survey filed May 13, 1984, in
Book 74 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 12, said point being the most southern corner of the
said "South Walnut Creek Area of Benefit" (Res. 94/604); thence along the boundary of said "South
Walnut Creek Area of Benefit," in a general northerly and easterly direction, 6,275 feet, more or
less, to the most eastern corner thereof, said point being the intersection of the centerline of Crest
Avenue with the extended west right of way line of South Main Street; thence along said extension
and west right of way line in a general southerly direction 565 feet, more or less, to the southeast
corner of Subdivision MS 114-75 filed October 20, 1976 in Book 49 of Parcel Maps at page 19;
thence along the arc of a non-tangent curve concave to the northwest having a radius of 1,096 feet
on the northwest line of the Southern Pacific Railroad right of way, northeasterly 52 feet, more or
less, to the most western corner of Assessor Parcel Number(hereinafter referred to as APN) 183-
093-031 described as PARCEL THIRTY-ONE in the deed to Contra Costa County recorded
December 9, 1985 in Book 12652 of Official Records at page 570; thence non-tangent along the
southwest line thereof, crossing Engineer's Station 603+65, southeasterly 110 feet, more or less,
to the southeast line of said County parcel, being a non-tangent curve concave to the northwest
having a radius of 1,196 feet and being concentric with said northwest line; thence along the arc
of said curve, northeasterly 52 feet, more or less, to the southwest line of APN 183-093-023
described in the deed to East Bay Municipal Utility District (hereinafter referred to as EBMUD)
recorded January 5, 1968 in Book 5530 of Official Records at page 93; thence along said
southwest line, south 22053'01"east 33.76 feet;thence crossing Rudgear Road, southeasterly 245
feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of APN 187-040-007 described as PARCEL 11 in the
deed to Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District recorded December
20, 1967 in Book 5520 of Official Records at page 451; thence along the boundary of PARCEL 11,
in a general southeasterly direction 1,036.02 feet and north 64016'18" east 239.65 feet, to the most
eastern corner thereof on the west right of way line of Interstate Freeway 680; thence along said
west line in a general southeasterly direction 836 feet, more or less, to the boundary of APN 187-
050-011 and 012 described as Parcel 1 in the deed to Edward Johannessen and Juliet
Johannessen 1987 Revocable Living Trust recorded March 22, 1988 in Book 14228 of Official
Records at page 211; thence along said boundary as follows: 1) south 63037'38" west 44.33 feet,
2) south 23015'36" east 359.22 feet, 3) north 64°03'39" east 14.72 feet, 4) south 23015'36" east
144.57 feet, 5) south 45021'24" west 36.15 feet, 6) south 55015'24" west 108.21 feet, 7) south
32031'24" west 152.34 feet, 8) south 12004'24" west 20.34 feet, 9) south 33°09'41" east 465.15
2
feet, 10) north 35°52'50" east 129.8 feet, 11) south 29021'32" east 64.96 feet, and 12) south
69°09'52" east 54.67 feet, to the most southeastern corner thereof on the west right of way line of
Interstate Freeway 680; thence along said west line in a general southeasterly direction 1,209.59
feet; thence crossing said freeway, north 53047'20" east 290 feet, more or less, to the east right
of way line thereof; thence along said east line in a general southeasterly direction 2,259.08 feet
to the west line of Subdivision 6468 recorded January 8, 1982 in Book 286 of Maps at page 41;
thence along said west line in a general northerly direction 828.77 feet to the south line of APN
187-160-013 described as Parcel Three in the deed to the City of Walnut Creek recorded July 5,
1984 in Book 11867 of Official Records at page 965; thence along said south line and the south
line of Subdivision 4810 filed September 23, 1976 in Book 189 of Maps at page 48, south
89043'18" east 944.73 feet, to the southwest corner of Subdivision 3037 recorded June 25, 1964
in Book 99 of Maps at page 30; thence along lot lines of Subdivision 3037, south 89043'18" east
933.43 feet, south 6°19'31" east 712.51 feet and along the north right of way line of Livorna Road,
north 72°23'20"east 145.74 feet; thence crossing Trotter Way, north 72°23'20" east 100 feet, more
or less, to the south line of Lot 131 (99 M 30); thence continuing along lot lines of Subdivision 3037
as follows: 1) along the north right of way line of Livorna Road, north 7202320" east 272.09 feet,
2) north 1 036'23" east 275.72 feet, 3) south 88°23'37" east 149.23 feet 4) south 1 036'23" west
223.71 feet, and 5) along the north right of way line of Livorna Road in a general easterly direction
79.27 feet, to the east boundary of Subdivision 3037; thence along said boundary in a general
northerly direction 1,532.28 feet to the northeast corner thereof, also being the southeast corner
of Subdivision 3827 recorded June 11, 1969 in Book 126 of Maps at page 38; thence along the
east line of Subdivision 3827, north 1 031'55"east 942.5 feet, to the southwest corner of Subdivision
5366 recorded March 25, 1980 in Book 236 of Maps at page 7; thence along the boundary of
Subdivision 5366 in a general easterly direction 400.83 feet to the southeast corner thereof on the
boundary of Subdivision 5931 recorded June 29, 1983 in Book 271 of Maps at page 21; thence
along the boundary of Subdivision 5931, in a general southeasterly direction 105.63 feet along
Livorna Heights Road right of way line and south 55°22'55" east 537 feet, to the southeast corner
of Subdivision 5931 on the west line of Subdivision 4402 recorded December 27, 1974 in Book 175
of Maps at page 25; thence along said west line, south 1 032'10"west 1063.35 feet to the northwest
corner of Subdivision 3973 recorded August 18, 1972 in Book 149 of Maps at page 20; thence
along the west line of Subdivision 3973 and its southern prolongation, south 1 03210" west 967.1
feet, to the centerline of Livorna Road; thence along said centerline in a general easterly direction
890.41 feet to the southern prolongation of the east line of Subdivision 3973; thence along said
prolongation and east line, north 1 04425"east 1,057.06 feet, to the southeast corner of Subdivision
4402 (175 M 25); thence continuing north 1°44'25" east 1,527.78 feet to the northeast corner of
Subdivision 4402 on the boundary of Subdivision 4924 recorded May 18, 1977 in Book 196 of
Maps at page 28; thence along said boundary in a general southeasterly direction 2,879.25 feet
to the southeast corner thereof on the boundary of Subdivision 6743 filed June 9, 1987 in Book 313
of Maps at page 28; thence along said boundary, north 21'53'15" west 3,423.26 feet, north
73016'01" east 4,566.44 feet, and south 13051'48" east 5,687.22 feet, to the most southern corner
thereof on the south line of Rancho San Miguel and the Record of Survey filed August 27, 1970
in Book 53 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 13; thence along said south line, south 76053'13"
east 1,445.41 feet, to the most southern corner of said Record of Survey (53 LSM 13) on the
boundary of that 787.58 acre parcel shown on the Record of Survey filed June 22, 1960, in Book
18 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 39; thence along the boundary of said parcel (18 LSM 39),
south 6°08'40" east 2,389.28 feet and north 87°52'06" east 9,881.20 feet to the southeast corner
thereof on the northwest line of Lot D, Rancho San Miguel Robert Allen Tract; thence along said
3
northwest line, northeasterly 3,100 feet, more or less, to the centerline of Mount Diablo Scenic
Boulevard ((North Gate Road); thence along said centerline in a general easterly direction 12,400
feet, more or less, to the centerline intersection of Summit Road; thence along the centerline of
Mount Diablo Scenic Boulevard (South Gate Road) in a general southerly direction 6,700 feet, more
or less, to the south line of Section 12 Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along said south line, easterly 4,400 feet, to the northwest corner of Section 18, Township
1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the west line of said Section 18 (T1 S,
R1 E) southerly 5,280 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner thereof; thence along the south
line of Sections 18, 17 and 16, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, easterly
15,840 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Section 22, Township 1 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian, thence along the west line of said Section 22 (T1 S, R1 E); southerly 5,280
feet, more or less, to the southwest corner thereof; thence along the south line of Sections 22 and
23 (T1 S, R1 E), easterly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of Section 26 (T1 S, R1 E);
thence, along the east line of Sections 26 and 35 (T1 S, R1 E), southerly 10,560 feet, more or less
to the northeast corner of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the east line of Sections 2 and 11 (US, R1 E), southerly 10,560 feet, more or less,
to the northeast corner of Section 14, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the north line of said Section 14, (US, R1 E), westerly 2,640 feet, more or less, to the
northeast corner of Parcel "D" of Subdivision MS 80-85 filed May 14, 1987, in Book 127 of Parcel
Maps at page 32; thence along the east line of said Parcel "D" and its southerly prolongation,
southerly 6,250 feet, more or less, to a point on the said boundary common to Contra Costa and
Alameda Counties; thence along said County boundary in a general westerly direction 2,800 feet,
more or less, to the Point of Beginning.
JH:jlg
g:\clerical\exhibits\southern.ccc
6/19/96
4
�.5
Boundary Description
SCC JEPA Sub-Regional Fee Area
APPENDIX "C"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, described as follows:
References to maps, boundary lines, and ownerships are to records of said County.
Beginning at the intersection of the west line of Section 23, Township 2 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian with the boundary common to Contra Costa and Alameda Counties; thence
from the Point of Beginning, along said County boundary in a general westerly direction 85,500
feet, more or less, to the intersection with the west line of Section 35, Township 1 South, Range
2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the west line of Sections 35, 26 and 23 (T1 S, R2W)
northerly 10,646 feet, more or less, to the west quarter corner of said Section 23 (T1 S, R2W);
thence along the mid-section line of Sections 23 and 24 easterly 10,060 feet, more or less, to the
northeast corner of PARCEL FIVE described in the deed to East Bay Regional Park District
(hereinafter referred to as EBRPD) recorded April 4, 1974, in Book 7189 of Official Records at
page 183; thence along the easterly boundary of said PARCEL FIVE in a general southeasterly
direction 1,218.70 feet to the northeast corner of PARCEL ONE described in the deed to the United
States of America recorded July 29, 1980, in Book 9930 of Official Records at page 913; thence
along said east line in a general southeasterly direction 192.27 feet to an angle point on the
boundary of said PARCEL FIVE (7189 O.R. 183); thence along said boundary in a general
southerly direction 2,325.7 feet to the northeast corner of Section 25, Township 1 South, Range
2 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the east line of said Section 25 (T1 S, R2W) southerly
4,442 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel "D" of Subdivision MS 301-77 filed May
24, 1978, in Book 66 of Parcel Maps at page 15; thence, along the north boundary of said
Subdivision MS 301-77, south 89058'27" east 3,009.88 feet to a point on the boundary of Parcel
"A" of Subdivision MS 853-91 filed April 28, 1995, in Book 166 of Parcel Maps at page 28; thence
along the boundary of Subdivision MS 893-91 the following courses: 1) south 24033'00" east
150.23 feet, 2) south 59042'00" west 136.11 feet, 3) north 32038'30" west 6.36 feet, 4) south
53°39'00"west 27.09 feet, 5) south 32°08'00" east 28.00 feet, 6) north 56°20'30" east 27.29 feet,
7) north 32038'30" west 18.88 feet, 8) north 59042'00"east 135.55 feet, 9) south 24030'00" east
23.58 feet, 10) south 36030'08"east 66.53 feet, 11) south 89012'02" east 2,076.95 feet, 12) north
9044'32" east 207.43 feet to the most eastern corner of Parcel "D" of said Subdivision, said point
being the most southern corner of Parcel "D" of Subdivision MS 167-79 filed September 17, 1981,
in Book 97 of Parcel Maps at page 35; thence, along the boundary of said Parcel "D" (97 PM 35),
north 9044'32" east 200.27 feet; thence north 48050'52" east 100.00 feet; thence, leaving the
boundary of said Parcel "D", north 48050'52"east 117.98 feet; thence north 64000'25" east 317.08
feet to the southwest corner of Lot 10 of Subdivision 3457 filed September 23, 1965, in Book 107
of Maps at page 30; thence southerly 672.69 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel
A of Subdivision 6098 filed May 11, 1984, in Book 279 of Maps at page 3; thence along the west
line of said Parcel A southerly 823.34 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the west boundary
line of the Rancho San Ramon; thence, southerly, along the west line of Section 32, Township 1
South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, 2,040 feet, more or less, to the West one quarter
corner of said Section 32 (T1 S, R1 W); thence, along the center of said Section 32 and its easterly
prolongation, in a general easterly direction, 3,750 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of
Lot 8 of Subdivision 3280 filed October 14, 1965, in Book 107 of Maps at page 43; thence, along
1
the south line of said Subdivision 3280 (107 M 43), in a general easterly direction, 380.89 feet to
the southwest corner of Lot 15 of Subdivision 2990 filed May 23, 1962, in Book 87 of Maps at page
27; thence, along the south line of said Subdivision 2990 (87 M 27), in a general easterly direction,
344.09 feet to the southwest corner of Subdivision 5312 filed September 26, 1978, in Book 217 of
maps at page 23; thence along the south line of said Subdivision 5312 (217 M 23), and its easterly
prolongation, in a general easterly direction, 400 feet, more or less, to the control line of Interstate
Highway 680; thence, along said control line of Interstate Highway 680, in a general northerly
direction 5,604 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the westerly prolongation of the north line
of Subdivision 4771 filed May 13, 1976, in Book 184 of Maps at page 21; thence along said
westerly prolongation and north line of Subdivision 4771, south 89000'57" east 352 feet, more or
less, to the northwest corner of Lot 22 of Subdivision 3325 filed August 25, 1964, in Book 100 of
Maps at page 37; thence along the north line of said Subdivision 3325 south 89000'57" east 903.64
feet to the northeast corner of said Subdivision 3325; thence continuing in a general easterly
direction, along the prolongation of the north line of said Subdivision 3325 (100 M 37) 462 feet,
more or less, to the northwest corner of Lot 28 of Subdivision 4841 filed November 8, 1976, in Book
191 of Maps at page 16; thence along the north line of said Subdivision 4841 in a general easterly
direction 1,152.20 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Lot 38 of Subdivision 3572 filed
July 27, 1966, in Book 112 of maps at page 12; thence along the north boundary of said
Subdivision 3572 in a general northeasterly direction 2,674.66 feet, more or less, to the northwest
corner of Lot 58 of said Subdivision 3572 (112 M 12), said point being the southwest corner of Lot
53 of Subdivision 3714 filed August 6, 1969, in Book 127 of Maps at page 34; thence along the
west line of Lots 53 and 52 and the northerly prolongation thereof north 7°15'12"west 255.08 feet
to the intersection with the monument line of Thornhill Road as shown on said map (127 M 34);
thence along said monument line of Thornhill Road south 71004,58" east 157.21 feet to the
intersection with the monument line of Old Orchard Drive as shown on said map (127 M 34); thence
along said monument line of Old Orchard Drive north 6000'00" west 175.85 feet and north
10°02'55"east 148.10 feet to the intersection with the monument line of Camino Tassajara Road
as shown on said map (127 M 34); thence along said monument line of Camino Tassajara Road
south 79057'05" east 407.58 feet to a standard county monument; thence from said monument
continuing along the monument line of Camino Tassajara Road, along the arc of a tangent curve,
concave to the south, having a radius of 1,000.00 feet, through a central angle of 2°12'18", a
distance of 38.48 feet to the intersection with the southerly prolongation of the east line of Lot 65
of Subdivision 6751 filed November 21, 1986, in Book 309 of Maps at page 16; thence along last
said line, north 17035'32" east 64.63 feet to the southeast corner of said Lot 65 (309 M 16); thence,
along the east line of Lots 65, 66, 67, 68 and 69 of said Subdivision 6751(309 M 16),'in a general
northerly direction 568.83 feet to the northeast corner of said Lot 69 (309 M 16), said point lying
on the boundary of Parcel "H" of Subdivision 6516 filed November 21, 1986, in Book 309 of Maps
at page 8; thence along the boundary of said Parcel "H" north 84052'20" west 127.64 feet; thence
north 12030'07" east 170.57 feet to a point on the boundary of Parcel "K-1" shown on said map
(309 M 16); thence along the boundary of said Parcel "K-1", north 7702953" west 14.00 feet;
thence north 12030'07" east 513.55 feet to the northwest corner of Subdivision 6516 (309 M 16);
thence along the northerly boundary of Subdivision 6516 in a general easterly direction 4,297.81
feet to the northeast corner thereof, said point being the south one-quarter corner of Section 22,
Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence continuing easterly along the
south line of said Section 22 (T1 S, R1 W), 2,633.40 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of
said Section 22, said point being the northwest corner of Parcel "J" of Subdivision 7058 filed
October 10, 1989, in Book 338 of Maps at page 19; thence along the west line of said Parcel "J"
southerly 2,666.16 feet to the southwest corner of said Parcel "J"; thence along the south boundary
2
of said Subdivision 7058 (338 M 19) in a general easterly direction 5,847.38 feet, more or less, to
the southeast corner of said Subdivision 7058, said point being the west one-quarter corner of
Section 25, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, said point also being the
southwest corner of Lot 48 of Subdivision 5024 filed July 12, 1978 in Book 214 of Maps at page
8; thence along the south line of said Subdivision 5024 easterly 1,290.35 feet to the southeast
corner thereof, said point being the southwest corner of Parcel "A" of Subdivision 5437 filed July
26, 1979, in Book 227 of Maps at page 1; thence along the southerly line of said Parcel "A" and
its easterly prolongation, easterly 2,152.42 feet to a railroad spike on the monument line of
Blackhawk Road as shown on said map (214 M 8); thence along said monument line of Blackhawk
Road, in a general northwesterly direction 4,181.97 feet, more or less, to the intersection with the
southwesterly prolongation of the northwest line of Parcel "C" of Subdivision 5438 filed August 14,
1979, in Book 228 of Maps at page 11; thence along said southwesterly prolongation and
northwest line of Parcel "C" north 35030'00" east 1,448.36 feet; thence, continuing along the
boundary of said Parcel "C" (228 M 11), the following courses: 1) south 71('30'00" east 137.22 feet,
2) north 1 000'00" east 250.00 feet, 3) south 68000'00" east 581.79 feet 4) east 1,277.80 feet to the
northeast corner of said Parcel "C" (228 M 11), said point being the southeast corner of the parcel
of land shown on the Record of Survey RS 2119 filed March 16, 1995, in Book 107 of Licensed
Surveyors' Maps at page 25; thence along the east line of said parcel (107 LSM 25) north 0°00'33"
east 549.72 feet to a point on the southerly line of Parcel "A" of Subdivision MS 174-76 filed April
28, 1977, in Book 54 of Parcel Maps at page 30; thence, along the southerly line of said Parcel "A"
south 89"53'11" west 1,305.04 feet to the southwest corner of said Parcel "A"; thence along the
west line of said Parcel "A" north 0029'03" east 3,295.71 feet to a point on the south line of Section
13, Township 1 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the south line of said
Section 13 (T1 S, R1 W) easterly 2,681.87 feet to the southwest corner of Section 18, Township 1
South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the south line of Sections 18, 17 and
16, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, easterly 15,840 feet, more or less
to the northwest corner of Section 22, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian;
thence along the west line of said Section 22 (T1 S, R1 E), southerly 5,280 feet, more or less, to the
southwest corner thereof; thence along the south line of Sections 22 and 23, Township 1 South,
Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, easterly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner
of Section 26, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence, along the east line
of Sections 26 and 35, Township 1 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian, southerly 10,560
feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of Section 2, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount
Diablo Meridian; thence along the east line of Sections 2 and 11, Township 2 South, Range 1 East,
Mount Diablo Meridian, southerly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of Section 14,
Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence along the north line of said
Section 14 (T2S, R1 E), westerly 2,640 feet, more or less, to the northeast corner of Parcel "D" of
Subdivision MS 80-85 filed May 14, 1987, in Book 127 of Parcel Maps at page 32; thence along
the east line of said Parcel "D" and its southerly prolongation, southerly 6,250 feet, more or less,
to a point on the said boundary common to Contra Costa and Alameda counties, thence, along said
County boundary in a general westerly direction 2,800 feet, more or less, to the Point of Beginning.
JH:jlg
gAclericaIlexhibitslsccjepa.ex
6/18/96
3
• a.6
Boundary Description
Dougherty Valley - Shapell
APPENDIX "D"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, described as follows:
References to maps, boundary lines and ownerships are to records of said County.
Beginning at the northwest corner of Parcel B of Subdivision MS 331-77 filed October 6, 1978, in
Book 70 of Parcel Maps at page 46; thence, along the west line of said Subdivision MS 331-77,
southerly 531.68 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel A of Subdivision MS 142-78
filed August 14, 1979, in Book 80 of Parcel Maps at page 8; thence, along the west line of
Subdivision MS 142-78, southerly 523 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel A of
Subdivision MS 32-89 filed August 24, 1990, in Book 148 of Parcel Maps at page 20; thence along
the west line of Subdivision MS 32-89 southerly 213.00 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner
of Parcel A of Subdivision MS 317-77 filed January 12, 1979, in Book 73 of Parcel Maps at page
30; thence along the west line of said Parcel A (73 PM 30), southerly 397.00 feet, more or less, to
the northwest corner of Parcel B of Subdivision MS 57-78 filed October 5, 1978, in Book 70 of
Parcel Maps at page 44; thence, along the west line of said Parcel B (70 PM 44), southerly 370.00
feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Parcel A of Subdivision MS 144-90 filed August 23,
1995, in Book 167 of Parcel Maps at page 15; thence, along the west line of Subdivision MS 144-
90, southerly 612.36 feet to the southwest corner thereof, said point lying on the south line of
Section 6, Township 2 South, Range 1 East, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence, along said south line
of Section 6, easterly 660.98 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of the 2,319.730 acre
parcel of land shown on the Record of Survey filed February 25, 1981, in Book 68 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 20; thence along the west boundary of said 2,319.730 acre parcel (68
LSM 20), in a general southerly direction 15,193.80 feet, more or less, to a point on the northern
line of the parcel of land described in the Final Judgement to the United States of America, Case
No. 22352, recorded August 2, 1947, in Book 1104 of Official Records at page 377; thence, along
said northern line (1104 O.R. 377), in a westerly direction, 3,175 feet, more or less, to the centerline
of Dougherty Road; thence along said centerline, in a general southerly direction 742 feet, more
or less, to the intersection with the easterly prolongation of the north line of Subdivision 7413 filed
October 30, 1992, in Book 364 of Maps at page 14; thence, along said easterly prolongation and
north line of Subdivision 7413 (364 M 14), north 77004'00"west 722.50 feet to the northwest corner
thereof, said point being the northeast corner of Subdivision 7038 filed December 27, 1990, in Book
354 of Maps at page 28, thence along the northerly boundary of said Subdivision 7038, north
77°04'57" west 514.20 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of the parcel of land described
in the deed to East Bay Municipal Utility District recorded May 19, 1978, in Book 8845 of Official
Records at page 149; thence along the exterior of said East Bay Municipal Utility District Parcel
(8845 O.R. 149) the following courses: 1) north 43009'35" west 1,180.00 feet, 2) north 54013'44"
west 490.00 feet, 3) south 47°33'50" west 380.00 feet and 4) south 10°13'51" east 582.74 feet to
the southwest corner thereof, said point lying on the northerly boundary of said Subdivision 7038
(354 M 28); thence along said northerly boundary north 77004'57" west 370.00 feet, more or less,
1
• • .5
to the most northern corner thereof, and point being the most northern corner of Parcel B of
Subdivision MS No. 184-67 filed December 7, 1967, in Book 2 of Parcel Maps at page 16; thence
along the northwesterly line of said Parcel B (2 PM 16) south 64°32'00"west 297.00 feet to a point
on the south line of the parcel of land described in the deed to Pacific Gas and Electric Company
recorded August 15, 1958, in Book 3211 of Official Records at page 565; thence leaving said line,
north 26°26'25"west 1,118.69 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of Parcel A of Subdivision
5599 filed October 16, 1980, in Book 246 of Maps at page 27; thence, along the east line of said
Parcel A (246 M 27), in a general northwesterly direction, 2,245.83 feet, more or less, to the
southeast corner of Parcel A of Subdivision 5902 filed June 5, 1985, in Book 291 of Maps at page
1; thence, along the east line of said Parcel A (290 M 1), in a general northwesterly direction,
2,255.86 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of Parcel F of Subdivision 6547 filed June 27,
1985, in Book 290 of Maps at page 1; thence, along the east line of said Subdivision 6547 (291 M
1), in a general northwesterly direction, 1,836.01 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of
Parcel C of Subdivision 6546 filed July 25, 1985 in Book 292 of Maps at page 1; thence, along the
east line of said Parcel C (292 M 1), in a general northwesterly direction, 2,668.99 feet, more or
less, to the southeast corner of Parcel J of Subdivision 6595 filed March 14, 1986, in Book 299 of
Maps at page 47; thence along the east line of said Subdivision 6595 (299 M 47), in a general
northwesterly direction, 3,650.65 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of Parcel JJ of
Subdivision 6550 filed November 6, 1986, in Book 308 of Maps at page 30; thence, along the
exterior boundary of said Subdivision 6550 (308 M 30) the following courses: 1) north 72008'23"
east 1,042.80 feet, 2) south 87°26'36" east 284.71 feet to the southwest corner of Parcel B of
Subdivision 6549 filed April 28, 1986, in Book 301 of Maps at page 48; thence, along the exterior
boundary of said Subdivision 6549 (301 M 48), south 88°42'18"east 2,630.10 feet to the southwest
corner of Section 1, Township 2 South, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian, thence along the
west line of said Section 1 (T2S, R1 W) northerly 660.34 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner
of Parcel J of Subdivision 7010 filed September 6, 1989, in Book 336 of Maps at page 46; thence,
along the south boundary of said Subdivision 7010 (336 M 46) in a general easterly direction,
7,850.36 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner thereof; thence, along the east boundary of
said Subdivision 7010, in a general northerly direction, 2,048.20 feet to the northeast corner
thereof, said point lying on the south line of Parcel C of Subdivision 6736 filed February 21, 1989,
in Book 330 of Maps at page 42, thence, along the south line of said Parcel C in a general easterly
direction, 787.16 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of Subdivision 6017 filed February 22,
1983, in Book 268 of Maps at page 14; thence, along the south line of said Subdivision 6017 in a
general easterly direction, 1,293.68 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of said Parcel B of
Subdivision MS 331-77 (70 PM 46), the Point of Beginning
JH-jig
g:\clerical\exhibits\DVaIly.ex
6/19/96
2
• . -D•6
Boundary Description
Dougherty Valley - Windemere
APPENDIX "E"
Real property in Southern Contra Costa County, California, being a portion of Lots 4, 6, 17, 24, 25,
26, 27, 29, 30, 37 and all of Lots 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 28 and 38 as shown on the map entitled
"Map of the Property of the Estate of Elizabeth A. Dougherty" filed in Book C of Maps at page 63,
records of said County, described as follows:
All of the 2,319.730 acre parcel of land shown on the Record of Survey filed February 25, 1981,
in Book 68 of Licensed Surveyors' Maps at page 20, records of said County.
JH:jlg
g Aderical\exhibits0ohty.val
6/17/96
1
_ D 5`
J.Michael Walford
Contra Public Works Department PuhBc WorbB Director
Costa 255 Glacier Drive
Martinez, CA 94553-4897 Milton F.Knbicek
Deputy->:ng;neer;ng
,-County Patricia R.McNamee
Deputy-Operations
Maurice M.Shiu
4
Deputy-Transportation
July 1, 1996
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
To: Dave Suico
File: SCCJEPA
WO# 0072 CP# 96-41
WE ARE SENDING YOU: ✓Attached, the following items:
Copies Description
1 COMPLETE SET OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS, WHICH MUST BE ATTACHED
TO YOUR BOARD ORDER.
In order to expedite this portion of the environmental process, please follow these steps:
1.) Please prepare a DRAFT board order for my review prior to finalizing.
2.) When the FINAL board order has been prepared and is ready to be submitted to the board, please
attach a complete set of environmental documents to it.
3.) Please advise me of the scheduled board date and provide me with a copy of the final board order.
If you have any questions regarding this process, please call me. Thank you.
Signed: Janet Frattini
Design Division
Phone: 3-2293
cAenvforms\envtrans
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Notice of Exemption
Contra Costa County Community Development Department
651 Pine Street, 4th Floor- North Wing, McBrien Administration Building
Martinez, CA 94553-0095
Telephone:(510) 313-2296 Contact Person:Vickie Germany- Public Works DPL
Project Description, Common Name Qf any) and Location: SOUTHERN CONTRA COSTA(SCC)JOINT EXERCISE
OF POWERS AGREEMENT (JEPA.) FEE AREAS, County File #96-41: The activity consists of setting up
boundaries and developing fees to finance construction of road improvement projects, associated with traffic
impacts created by development in the Dougherty Valley, including improvements to 1-680. Coordination of fee
collection and project funding will occur between the Town of Danville, City of San Ramon, and Contra Costa
County.
Location: Areas of the activity to receive road improvements are located in Southern Contra Costa County.
This project is exempt from CEQA as a:
Ministerial Project(Sec.15268) _ Other Statutory Exemption,Section_
Declared Emergency(Sec.15269(a)) General Rule of Applicability(Section 15061(b)(3))
Emergency Project(Sec.1.5269(b)or(c))
Categorical Exemption,Class_ Section
for the following reason(s): The project will not have a significant effect on the environment.
It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a significant adverse effect on the
environment.
Date: By:
Community Development Department Representative
AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING
I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by California Public
Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing date.
Signature Title
Applicant:
County Public Works Department
255 Glacier Drive
Martinez,CA 94553
Attn: Janet Frattini County Clerk Fee$25 Due
• Form 1024.1 B
DETERMINATION THAT AN ACTIVITY
IS EXEMPT FROM THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
FILE NO. o&s51-&j-oo-72. CP NO. 96- s
ACTIVITY NAME: Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement
(JEPA) Fee Areas.
DATE: June 5, 1996
PREPARED BY: Janet Frattini
This activity is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
pursuant to Article 5, Section 15061 (b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
It can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity may have a
significant adverse effect on the environment.
DESCRIPTION OF THE ACTIVITY:
The activity consists of setting up boundaries and developing fees to finance construction
of road improvement projects, associated with traffic impacts created by development in
the Dougherty Valley, including improvements to 1-680. Coordination of fee collection and
project funding will occur between the Town of Danville, City of San Ramon, and Contra
Costa County.
LOCATION:
Areas to receive road improvements are located in Southern Contra Costa County and are
shown on Figures 1-3. -
REVIEWED BY: -- - DATE:
Vickie Germany,
Environmental Planner
APPROVED BY: l �' i�!t,!i i'i (�''l DATE:
Community Development Representative
0determin\SC0JEPA/det
(form revised 4/13/95)
4 Z
0
0
Y
. Z
i
4
� O W
o 0
a
d
o 0
o •
00
Z
0
0
D �
r
k
m
• d
r
1fi 1 v �
-
•\
CD N
+t i 3p
t � •\.
f
ri .Ux%J�, 3
r 6
c� 4 r "
CA, CD
a `
Li
! r -
i
i J
kt c ✓
A:>
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: AUGUST 6, 1996
SUBJECT: SOUTHERN CONTRA COSTA JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT (SCC
JEPA). PROJECT NO.: 0676-6P4070
SPECIFIC REQUESTS) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
I. Recommended Action:
APPROVE and AUTHORIZE the Chair of the Board of Supervisors to execute the Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement between the County, the City of San Ramon ("City"), and the Town of
Danville ("Town") regarding the funding of regional and subregional road projects in the Southern
Contra Costa County Area.
II. Financial Impact:
There is no financial impact to the County General Fund. The SCC JEPA will provide funding for
the proposed projects through the imposition of developer fees.
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
Southern Contra Costa County will experience significant growth under the current General Plan,
most notably, within the Dougherty Valley area. In order for the transportation infrastructure to
keep pace with the growth of population in the area, the City, Town, and County have prepared
a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement. The Agreement provides for the three jurisdictions to
assess developer traffic fees to finance transportation projects made necessary by the area
development.
IV. Consequences of Negative Action:
Failure to execute the SCC JEPA between the City, Town, and County will leave unfunded
projects necessary to mitigate proposed development in the South County area.
Continued on Attachment:_ SIGNATURE:
_RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
—APPROVE —OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON tG 0 61996 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED V OTHER_
VOyE OF SUPERVISORS
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT )
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
ML:ml t henebY Can*/that this%a true and=.ad OW of
g;\transeng\SCC JEPA 62 an action taken and 9entered own theminutest o
SMSM.
Orig.Div: Public Works(TE) PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the board
Contact: Martin Lysons,Tel.313-2295 01s°Pe^i1somand County AdMW*aW
cc: F. Scudero,Accounting
J.Dillon,City of San Ramon �►
B.Welch,Town of Danville
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
PERTAINING TO
Southern Contra Costa Fees
for
Traffic Mitigation
BY AND BETWEEN
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
CITY OF SAN RAMON
TOWN OF DANVILLE
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
Southern Contra Costa Fee
for
Traffic Mitigation
This JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT (the
"Agreement") is entered into this day of , 1996 (the
"Effective Date") between the COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA (the
"County"), a political subdivision of the State of California, the City of
San Ramon (the "City"), a municipal corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California, and the Town of
Danville (the "Town"), a municipal corporation duly organized and
existing under the laws of the State of California. The City, Town, and
County may be referred to collectively as the "Parties."
RECITALS
This Agreement is based on the following facts and circumstances:
A. Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Development Area. There exists in Contra
Costa County a geographical area comprising the San Ramon Valley, Tassajara Valley
and Dougherty Valley. The San Ramon Valley and Dougherty Valley contain the City,
Town, and portions of the County. The approximate boundaries of the SCC Development
Area are shown on the map attached as Exhibit"A."
B. Dougherty Valley Development. There is an approved development in the
County portion of Dougherty Valley that includes the Shapell project and the Windemere
project. These two projects combined are approved for 11,000 residential units with the
first 8,500 residential units covered by this Agreement. The remaining 2,500 units shall
be constructed only after additional traffic studies are completed. The project approvals
include between 300,000 and 600,000 square feet of commercial space spread throughout
the Dougherty Valley Development. The location of these two projects are shown on the
map attached as Exhibit "C." The Shapell and Windemere projects are referred to
collectively as the "Dougherty Valley Developments."
C. Other Development. There exist other properties outside of Dougherty Valley
and within the City, Town, and County anticipated to be developed during the duration of
this Agreement. The exact location and/or extent of these developments is not fully known
at this time. These developments combined are estimated to contain 1,500 residential
units, 170,000 square feet of commercial space, and 80,000 square feet of office space.
This other development shall be referred to in this Agreement as "Other Developments."
The area that contains these Other Developments is referred to as the "SCC Sub-Regional
Fee Area" and is shown on the map attached as Exhibit "D."
Page 2 of 17
D. Regional Development. The City, Town, and County have identified regional
(1-680 freeway) improvement projects which are listed in Section 7 of this Agreement. The
SCC Regional Fee assesses all new development throughout the SCC Development Area
a fee to finance a portion of these improvements. The approximate boundaries of the SCC
Development Area are shown on the map attached as Exhibit "A." "Regional-only
Development" is development in an area within the SCC Development Area and outside
both the Dougherty Valley Development area and the SCC Sub-Regional Fee Area.
E. Impact of Development. The Dougherty Valley Developments are approved
for phased development of 11,000 units to be completed by approximately 2010. The
exact timing and location of the Other Developments are not known at this time. The
Dougherty Valley Developments are initially expected to create 8,500 new residential
units. The traffic impact from the new residential units will adversely impact the quality of
life for the existing residents of the surrounding City, Town, and County unless those
impacts are mitigated by off-site street improvements.
F . Traffic Impact Mitigation and Improvements. An Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), including a traffic study, has been prepared and certified by the County for
the Dougherty Valley Developments. A project list of public improvements necessary to
mitigate the Dougherty Valley Developments was included in the EIR. Following approval
of the Dougherty Valley Developments, a lawsuit was filed by the Town and City against
the County regarding the approval of the Dougherty Valley Developments. The Town,
City, and County have mutually agreed upon a settlement agreement which is based on
a second traffic study and revised project list (South County Traffic Study, 1994). Included
yin the settlement agreement are traffic mitigations based upon the revised project list. A
list of the projects and their estimated cost are attached as Exhibit "B" and are collectively
referred to in this Agreement as "the Improvements."
G. Annexation Proposed. The City proposes to annex portions of the Dougherty
Valley Development as phases are completed and an adequate funding mechanism is
established. The development applications for the Dougherty Valley Developments have
been processed and approved by the County. The County will review the improvement
plans for each phase and, as appropriate, issue building permits.
H. Collection and Use of Improvement Fees. The Parties intend and agree that
the traffic mitigation fees collected from the Dougherty Valley Developments and the Other
Developments shall fully fund the Improvements listed in Exhibit "B" as C-1 and C-2
projects, and partially fund the Improvements listed in Exhibit "B" as C-3 projects. The
Parties shall collect fees for the Improvements on an equitable basis. The Parties shall
use the fees collected in a coordinated manner to finance and construct the Improvements.
The purpose of this Agreement is to implement the collection and use of the improvement
fees to construct the Improvements. These traffic mitigation improvement fees will be
referred to as the "Southern Contra Costa Fees" or the "SCC Fees."
Page 3 of 17
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree:
1. Parties.
The parties to this Agreement are City, Town, and County.
2. Definitions.
a. "Dwelling Unit'means a separate living space for one family. The term does
not include a second unit within the meaning of Government Code Section 65852.2
or the alteration or enlargement of an existing dwelling unit.
b. "Dougherty Valley Developments" refers collectively to the Shapell and
Windemere projects located within the County portion of Dougherty Valley.
C. "Other Developments" refers collectively to developments located within the
SCC Sub-Regional Fee area as designated in Exhibit A and outside of Dougherty
Valley.
d. "Regional-only Development" is development in an area within the SCC
Development Area and outside both Dougherty Valley and the SCC Sub-Regional
Fee Area.
e. "Improvements" refers to those public improvements required to mitigate
traffic impacts of the Dougherty Valley Developments as identified in the Settlement
Agreement and consists of those projects listed in Exhibit"B." "Improvement" refers
to one or part of one of the projects listed in Exhibit "B."
f. "Land Use Entitlement" means a permit or approval granted for the
development of property and includes a subdivision map approval, land use permit,
development plan approval, grading permit, building permit, and architectural or
design review approval.
g. "Settlement Agreement" refers to the"Agreement to Settle Litigation Relating
to the Dougherty Valley General Plan Amendment, Specific Plan and Environmental
Impact Report," an agreement executed by the Town, City, and County in May,
1994. A list of traffic mitigation projects is included as part of the Settlement
Agreement and attached to this Agreement as Exhibit "B." The traffic mitigation
projects are listed as C-1 projects (to be paid for in full by the Dougherty Valley
Developments), C-2 projects (to be paid in full by Dougherty Valley Developments
and Other Developments), and C-3 projects (the "Danville Mitigation" projects) in
the Settlement Agreement and in Exhibit "B."
h. "Southern Contra Costa Fees"and"SCC Fees" refer to fees imposed by the
City, Town, and County on development within the SCC Development Area. The
SCC Fees include the Dougherty Valley Fee, the SCC Sub-Regional Fee, and the
SCC Regional Fee.
Page 4 of 17
L "SCC Regional Fee" refers to the category of SCC Fees that is dedicated to
area freeway improvement projects, in accordance with Measure C. The project list
for the SCC Regional Fee is in Section 7 of this Agreement.
j. "SCC Sub-Regional Fee" refers to the category of SCC Fees that is
dedicated to local road improvements that mitigate Dougherty Valley developments
and Other Developments. The projects to be funded by this fee are listed as "C-2"
and "C-3" projects in the Settlement Agreement and in Exhibit "B."
k. "S-1 Fee" refers to the category of fee that is dedicated to funding roadway
system improvements that mitigate the Shapell development within Dougherty
Valley (such improvements shall be referred to as "S-1 projects"). These
improvements are to be funded entirely by the Shapell development.
The S-1 Fee is a sub-category of the Dougherty Valley Fee. It will be collected as
part of the Dougherty Valley Fee, and will be placed in the SCC Sub-Regional Fee
trust fund. Funds will be withdrawn from the Sub-Regional Fee trust fund as
needed to construct the S-1 projects.
I. "W-1 Fee" refers to the category of fee that is dedicated to funding roadway
system improvements that mitigate the Windemere project within Dougherty Valley
(these improvements shall be referred to as "W-1 projects"). These improvements
are to be funded entirely by the Windemere project.
The W-1 Fee is a sub-category of the Dougherty Valley Fee. It will be collected as
part of the Dougherty Valley Fee, and will be placed in the SCC Sub-Regional Fee
trust fund. Funds will be withdrawn from the Sub-Regional Fee trust fund as
needed to construct the W-1 project.
M. "Danville Mitigation Fee" refers to a portion of the Dougherty Valley Fee
($200 per unit)that will partially fund construction mitigation projects (overlays and
soundwalls)within the Town. These projects are listed in the Settlement Agreement
and in Exhibit "B" as C-3 projects.
n. "Dougherty Valley Fee" refers to the category of fee that will be charged only
to developments within the Dougherty Valley. The Dougherty Valley Fee includes
the Danville Mitigation Fee, the S-1 Fee (for the Shapell project), the W-1 Fee (for
the Windemere project), and the Dougherty Valley developments' fair share (pro
rata share determined by the South County Traffic Study) for sub-regional
improvements (the C-1 and C-2 subregional projects).
o. "Single Family Unit" refers to a detached building designed for occupation
as the residence of one family.
Page 5 of 17
•
p. "Multi Family Unit" refers to a building or part thereof designed and used
exclusively as a dwelling unit among other dwelling units, either on the same parcel
(e.g., apartments and mobile home parks) or under separate ownership (e.g.,
townhomes, duplexes, or duets).
q. "Office" refers to developments for the purpose of housing non-commercial,
non-manufacturing businesses.
r. "Commercial" refers to developments for the purpose of retail and wholesale
sales of merchandise and services.
S. "Underlying jurisdiction" refers to the party to this Agreement in whose
territory a specific project lies.
3. Collection of Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fees.
Each party agrees to collect the appropriate Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee a
development located within the SCC Development Area which receives a land use
entitlement from that party. The amount of that fee is described in Section 11.
To accomplish the collection of fees, each party agrees:
a. to adopt the necessary ordinance(s) and/or resolution(s) to authorize the
collection of the SCC Fees within its jurisdiction; and
b. to impose a condition of approval upon each development which states
substantially the following:
The project developer shall be required to pay the SCC Fees to the [City,
Town, or County] prior to issuance of building permits for the project.
4. Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fees Trust Fund Accounts.
Each party shall place the fees collected under Section 3 in an interest-bearing individual
trust fund account to be used specifically for the SCC Fees. The deposits in each account
shall be invested in the same manner as other funds of the party. For investment
purposes the funds may be pooled with other funds as long as separate accounting is
maintained and the SCC Fees trust fund accounts are credited with the investment
earnings.
5. Joint Accounting.
Semiannually, on April 1 and October 1 of each year, the Parties shall exchange
information regarding the fees collected and investment earnings in each party's SCC
Fees Trust Fund account. The information shall be shared in a form and manner to be
subsequently agreed to by the Parties.
Page 6 of 17
Within 30 days after the information is exchanged, the Parties shall transfer funds among
themselves from one party's SCC Fees Trust Fund account to another, as appropriate,
based upon the distribution provisions set forth in Section 14.
6. The Southern Contra Costa Fees.
The Southern Contra Costa Fees (SCC Fees) consists of three components: the regional
fee ("SCC Regional Fee"), the sub-regional fee (SCC Sub-Regional Fee), and the
Dougherty Valley Fee, which will be charged only to Dougherty Valley Developments.
7. The SCC Regional Fee.
The regional fee shall be used to fund a portion of the costs of three projects:
1. Improvements to the 1-680 ramps at Alcosta Boulevard
2. Auxiliary lane along 1-680 from Diablo Road to Bollinger Canyon Road
3. Improvements to the 1-680 ramps at Stone Valley Road
If, during the life of this JEPA, another regional fee (e.g., the MC fee) is adopted, the
SCC Regional Fee will be adjusted to avoid double-charging developments for any
projects that are both on the SCC list and on the subsequently adopted regional fee project
list. Below is a summary of the SCC Regional Fees.
SCC Regional Residential Fee: $792 per single family residential unit
SCC Regional Commercial Fee: $0.79 per square foot gross floor area
SCC Regional Office Fee: $1.27 per square foot gross floor area
8. SCC Sub-Regional Fee.
The SCC Sub-Regional Fee shall be used to fund projects in the SCC Sub-Regional Fee
Area (within the City, Town, and County). These projects are listed in Exhibit "B" of this
document and in the Settlement Agreement as "C-2" and "C-3" projects. Below is a
summary of the SCC Sub-Regional Fees.
SCC Sub-Regional Residential Fee: $2,128 per single family residential unit
SCC Sub-Regional Commercial Fee: $2.13 per square foot gross floor area
SCC Sub-Regional Office Fee: $3.41 per square foot gross floor area
9. Dougherty Valley Fee.
The Dougherty Valley Fee will include the Danville Mitigation Fee, the S-1 Fee (for the
Shapell project), the W-1 Fee (for the Windemere project), and the Dougherty Valley
Development's fair share (pro rata share determined by the South County Traffic Study)
Page 7 of 17
•
for sub-regional improvements (these projects are C-1 and C-2 projects in the Settlement
Agreement and in Exhibit °B").
Danville Mitigation Fee: $200 per Dougherty Valley residential unit
S-1 Fee: $937 per Shapell residential unit
Fair Share of C-1 & C-2: $2,009 per Dougherty Valley residential unit
10. W-1 Fee.
The W-1 Fee shall be collected from the residential portion of the Windemere project in
the Dougherty Valley to pay for the construction of Windemere Parkway when needed.
Funds collected as W-1 Fees shall be placed in a Construction Project Deposit Trust Fund
(Fund No. 8198), to be used by the developer to construct Windemere Parkway when
needed. When conditioned to construct Windemere Parkway, the developer shall post a
bond for the project. Once the project is bonded, the developer shall be allowed to
withdraw the W-1 Fee funds to finance the construction of the Windemere Parkway.
The W-1 Fee shall be as follows:
Fee Units Total
Phase 1, Multi-family $750/unit 1285 $ 963,750
Phase 1, Single-family $1,250/unit 1000 $ 1,250,000
Phase 2 $1,800/unit 950 $ 1,710,000
Phase 3 $2,000/unit 1000 $ 2,000,000
I Phase 4 $2,000/unit 935 $1,870,000
Total W-1 Fees collected: $ 7,793,750
The W-1 Fee shall be incorporated into the Dougherty Valley Fee for the Windemere
project.
11. SCC Fee Amount and Time of Payment.
The applicability of the SCC Fees on development within the SCC Development Area will
depend upon the location of the development. Dougherty Valley Development will pay the
Dougherty Valley Fee and SCC Regional Fee. Other Development will pay the SCC Sub-
Regional Fee and SCC Regional Fee. Regional-Only Development will pay only the SCC
Regional Fee. Below is a summary of the applicable SCC Residential Fees to each
development area as defined by this Agreement.
Page 8 of 17
Dougherty Valley
Development Other Development
Shapell Windemere County City Town
SCC Regional $792 $792 $792 $792 $792
Fee -
SCC Sub- N/A N/A $2,128 $2,128 $2,128
Regional Fee
Dougherty Valley $3,146* $3,717** N/A NIA N/A
Fee
TOTALS $ 3,938 $ 4,509 $ 2,920 $ 2,920 $ 2,920
*The Dougherty Valley Fee for the Shapell project includes$937 per unit for the S-1 projects.
**This is the average SCC Dougherty Valley Fee for the Windemere project including the phased W-1 Fee.
The W-1 Fee will increase as noted in the table in Section 10.
The SCC Fees shall be collected prior to the issuance of a building permit.
12. SCC Fee Adjustments.
The amount of each SCC Fee (Dougherty Valley Fee, SCC Sub-Regional Fee, and the
SCC Regional Fee) may be adjusted by a written addendum to this Agreement signed by
the Parties, provided that the adjustment is not in conflict with the terms of the Settlement
Agreement.
On March 1 of each year that this Agreement is in effect, each party shall adjust the fee
for each land use set forth above for inflation. The adjusted fees shall be the amounts in
effect for the preceding calendar year, increased or decreased by the amount of the
change in the Engineering News-Record Construction Cost Index for the San Francisco
Bay Area for the period ending December 31 of the preceding fiscal year. On March 1 of
each year this Agreement is in effect, each party shall increase the amount of each of the
fees set forth above over the amounts in effect for the preceding calendar year by an
amount determined necessary for any significant changes in State or Federal construction
requirements.
13. Administrative Costs.
The total funds to be collected by the SCC Fees shall include a 1% increase over the total
cost of the projects to be constructed under this Agreement to cover the administrative
costs of the Agreement.
Page 9 of 17
14. Fund Distribution.
The parties agree to the following semi-annual distribution of the funds collected by the
SCC Fees:
a. SCC Regional Fees: after withholding 1% of each fee for administrative
costs, SCC Regional Fees will be distributed to the Parties as follows:
City shall receive 19.6%
Town shall receive 73.5%
County shall receive 6.9%
b. SCC Sub-Regional Fees: SCC Sub-Regional Fees will be distributed to the
Parties in accordance with the following table:
Sub-Regional Residential Fees Collected/Building Permit Issued in:
City Town County
City $1,359 (63.9%) $404 (19%) $1,338 (62.9%)
receives
Town $1,596 (75%)
receives
County $769 (36.1%) $128 (6%) $790 (37.1%)
receives
Total $2,128 $2,128 $2,128
Sub-Regional Commercial Fee: $2.13 per square foot gross floor area
Sub-Regional Office Fee: $3.41 per square foot gross floor area
All the identified commercial and office development in the SCC Sub-
Regional Fee Area are located in the City. The following fee distributions the
SCC Sub-Regional Commercial and Office Fees include the 1% the City is
to withhold to cover the costs of fee collection and quarterly disbursement.
SCC Sub-Regional Commercial Fee:
City receives $1.36 per square foot gross floor area
County receives $0.77 per square foot gross floor area
TOTAL Fee $2.13 per square foot gross floor area
SCC Sub-Regional Office Fee:
City receives $2.17 per square foot gross floor area
County receives $1.24 per square foot gross floor area
TOTAL Fee $3.41 per square foot gross floor area
Page 10 of 17
0
C. Dougherty Valley Fees for the Shapell Development: Dougherty Valley Fees
will be distributed to the parties in accordance with the following:
For each residential traffic mitigation fee of $3,146 collected from the
Shapell development for the Dougherty Valley Fee,
City receives $ 2,600
Town receives $ 267
County receives $ 279
TOTAL $ 3,146
For each residential traffic mitigation fee collected from Windemere
development for the Dougherty Valley Fee, the distribution will be as follows:
Phase and TOTAL Town City County
Land Ule W-1 Fee. Dougherty receives: receives: receives:
Valley Fee
Phase 1 $ 750 $2,959 $267 $1,670 $1,022
Multi Family
Phase 1 $1,250 $3,459 $267 $1,670 $1,522
Single
Family
Phase 2 $1,800 $4,009 $267 $1,670 $2,072
Residential
Phase 3 $2,000 $4,209 $267 $1,670 $2,272
and 4
Residential
For traffic mitigation fees collected from Windemere development or Shapell
development for commercial development within Dougherty Valley, the fees shall be
distributed as follows:
City receives $1.57 per square foot gross floor area
Town receives $0.28 per square foot gross floor area
County receives $0.36 per square foot gross floor area
TOTAL Commercial Fee $2.21 per square foot gross floor area
d. In the event of an incorporation into the City or Town of a development that
encompasses a project listed in the Settlement Agreement, the fund
distribution shall be adjusted, and any SCC fees previously collected for that
project shall be transferred to the incorporating party.
Page 11 of 17
•
15. Construction of the Improvements.
a. City, Town, and County shall use the funds disbursed under Section 14 only
for the design, environmental review, construction contract, and related costs
of the projects listed in Exhibit "B." It is the intention of the Parties that the
projects listed in Exhibit "B" shall be completed as needed to satisfy the
Growth Management and Congestion Management Program requirements.
If a project crosses jurisdictional boundaries, the Parties shall make every
effort to coordinate the projects between jurisdictions. A copy of each party's
current project priority list should be transmitted to the other parties with the
March 1 disbursement of funds.
b. Upon acceptance of an Improvement, the ownership and responsibility for
maintenance of the Improvement rest with the party having jurisdiction over
the area containing the Improvement.
16. Growth Management and Congestion Management Program Requirements.
The Parties agree to meet and develop a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) based upon
each party's priority list and the projected fee revenue for the duration of the Agreement.
An initial CIP shall be included in this Agreement by amendment within six months of the
effective date of this Agreement. The parties shall review said CIP annually and make
necessary adjustments by amendment. Updates to the CIP shall be based upon the new
priority lists and projected income of each jurisdiction.
17. Reimbursement for Developer-Constructed Proiects.
If a developer elects, or is required as a condition of approval for development, to
construct one or part of one of the Improvements, the developer shall be eligible to receive
reimbursement or credit toward the appropriate SCC Fee.
Credit: A credit is considered to be a portion of the SCC Fee that the developer will be
relieved of paying in exchange for the construction of one or part of one of the
Improvements. The developer shall pay the full Fee amount to the collecting jurisdiction
(i.e., the jurisdiction in which the development lies). After the ensuing semi-annual review
(see Section 5), the Parties will distribute the fees in accordance with the provisions of
Section 14. The underlying jurisdiction (i.e., the jurisdiction in which the subject road
improvements are constructed) will issue the credit for the road improvements to the
developer once it has received its share of the semi-annual fee distribution. The credit
received by the developer shall be limited to the lesser of:
1. the underlying jurisdiction's share of the road fee obligation required by this
Agreement or
2. the "eligible cost" for the Improvement as determined by the underlying
jurisdiction.
Page 12 of 17
For example, if a Dougherty Valley developer elects to construct a C-2 project in the City
(the underlying jurisdiction) as a mitigation for its development, the development would pay
its full Dougherty Valley Fee to the County(the collecting jurisdiction). After the next semi-
annual review, the County would disburse the appropriate share of fees to the City. Credit
would then be issued by the City to the developer.
Reimbursement: If the eligible cost of an Improvement to be built by the developer is
greater than the amount credited, the underlying jurisdiction and the developer shall enter
into a reimbursement agreement prior to the commencement of construction of the
Improvement.
Reimbursement will begin at the time additional funds become available to the underlying
jurisdiction for the Improvement constructed by the developer. Reimbursements will be
made at the end of each fiscal quarter, with July 1 being the beginning of the fiscal year.
The underlying jurisdiction reserves the right not to make a quarterly payment if the
amount of available funds in the appropriate SCC Fee trust fund account is less than the
total of all the reimbursements owed. In such cases, the underlying jurisdiction may
choose to pay some lesser amount for each agreement than is owed in a quarter based
on the ratio of the amounts owed for each agreement for that quarter to the total owed that
quarter. A minimum fund balance of $50,000 in each jurisdiction will be maintained each
quarter after all reimbursements are made.
The amount of each quarterly payment will depend on the fund balance, on the amount of
fees collected and available for reimbursement, and on all other terms listed herein. A
developer could therefore be reimbursed in one quarter and not reimbursed in another
quarter because of the construction of an Improvement by the County, City, or Town. No
interest shall be paid on the outstanding balance due to the developer. Interest shall be
used for construction of Improvements or Agreement administration costs.
Reimbursement agreements shall remain in effect until paid in full. The first quarter shall
be the one following the quarter in which the underlying jurisdiction accepts the
constructed road improvements as complete.
Costs eligible for credit or reimbursement: Only those road improvements identified
in Exhibit°B" are eligible for creditor reimbursement. Some improvements (such as curbs,
gutters, paths, sidewalks, drainage facilities, fences, and soundwalls) which are located
along the property frontage of the development are not eligible for credit or reimbursement
unless explicitly identified as part of an Improvement identified in Exhibit °B." Credit or
reimbursement is limited to the amount estimated for the Improvement and used in the
calculation of the SCC Fees.
The determination of the "eligible costs" for credit or reimbursement will be based on at
least three independent bids for the Improvement. The developer shall submit said bids
to the public works department of the underlying jurisdiction for review and concurrence.
Upon the department's concurrence with the bids, the lowest acceptable, verifiable bid
shall be the basis for determination of the credit and/or reimbursement amount. The
eligible amount shall not exceed the estimated cost of the Improvement used in the
Page 13 of 17
calculation of the SCC Fee and listed in Exhibit "B." The underlying jurisdiction shall
reserve the right to reject the developers' bids or any other proposed value for said
"eligible costs" and to calculate said costs using the bond estimate prices.
Offsite right of way acquisition costs shall be eligible for credit or reimbursement of the
SCC Fee, except that the cost of any right of way work performed by the underlying
jurisdiction (e.g., negotiation, right of way condemnation, etc.) shall be subtracted from the
amount eligible for credit or reimbursement. Right of way for an Improvement that is
dedicated by the developer will not be eligible for credit or reimbursement unless the right
of way take is greater on the developer's side of the road than on the other side of the
road, resulting in an excessive take. In such cases, the amount of reimbursement allowed
shall be determined by the underlying jurisdiction.
Any extra work or change orders, either required by the Parties or determined necessary
by the developer, must be agreed to in writing by the developer and the underlying
jurisdiction to be included in the credit or reimbursement amount. Work performed by the
developer prior to execution of a written credit and/or reimbursement agreement between
the underlying jurisdiction and the developer shall not be eligible for credit or
reimbursement.
Utility Relocation Costs: The developer shall be responsible for utility relocation costs
for projects along the frontage of his development. Any offsite Improvement will be
considered a County, City, or Town project and the underlying jurisdiction will require the
utility companies to relocate the utilities at their cost.
Administrative Costs: The total amount of funds eligible for credit or reimbursement
under each agreement shall be reduced by 1% to cover the administrative costs of the
reimbursement agreement.
18. Independent Planning Action.
Nothing in this Agreement shall have any bearing on the determination of which party will
process a development application for any of the developments. Further, nothing in this
Agreement shall have any bearing on the determination of how many dwelling units or how
much non-residential space may be permitted or the nature of the development to be
approved by the party having jurisdiction over a particular development.
19. Amendments.
This Agreement may be amended at any time by an amendment mutually executed by the
City, Town, and County. Such amendments shall be approved by the governing board or
council of each party.
Page 14 of 17
20. Existing Area of Benefit Proarams.
The SCC Fee generates revenue to fund improvements mitigating impacts attributable to
the Dougherty Valley and Other Developments; it is not intended to replace existing areas
of benefit.
The parties agree to amend their existing area of benefit programs to eliminate any
duplication of projects between their existing areas of benefit and this Agreement. Each
party shall be responsible for amendments to their own area of benefit project lists and
shall hold the other parties harmless in the event of liability arising from the failure to
amend the project list for its own area of benefit.
21. Indemnification and Hold Harmless.
Each party to this Agreement shall defend, indemnify, including for attorneys' fees and
costs, save, and hold harmless the other parties, their boards or councils, officers, agents,
and employees from any and all claims, demands, suits, costs, expenses, or liability for
any damages, injury, sickness, or death, including liability for inverse condemnation,
nuisance, or trespass, arising directly or indirectly from, or in any way connected with, the
design, construction, installation, inspection, operation, maintenance, or repair of those
road improvement projects located within the indemnitor's jurisdiction.
Nothing in this section is intended to affect the legal liability of any party to third parties by
imposing any standard of care different from the standard of care imposed by law.
Nothing in this section is intended to affect the provisions of Government Code Section
57325 as to territory annexed subsequent to the execution of this Agreement.
A party is not liable to another party for the inadvertent failure or legal inability to collect
a fee.
22. Insurancg.
For the design and construction of road improvement projects within their respective
jurisdictional boundaries, the Parties to this Agreement shall cause all contract documents
for such work to include provisions requiring the consultant or contractor: (1) to name all
Parties to this Agreement, their boards or councils, officers, agents, and employees as
additional insureds under any insurance provided by the consultant or contractor; (2) to
provide to all Parties to this Agreement a certificate or certificates of insurance evidencing
such coverage and to provided at least 30 days' written notice of lapse, cancellation, or
other termination of coverage; and (3) to promise to defend, indemnify, including for
attorneys' fees and costs, save and hold harmless all Parties to this Agreement, their
boards or councils, officers, agents, and employees from any loss, damage, injury, death,
claim, or demand connected in any way with the work or services performed by the
consultant or contractor, the consultant's or contractor's subcontractors, or anyone under
the consultant's or contractor's direction or control. If more than one consultant or
Page 15 of 17
contractor is employed, the term "consultant" or"contractor" shall refer to all consultants
and contractors employed by the Parties to this Agreement.
23. Term of Agreement.
With the exception of Section 21 (Indemnification and Hold Harmless), which shall remain
in effect in perpetuity, this Agreement shall remain in effect from the Effective Date in the
opening paragraph until:
a. the projects listed in Exhibit "B" have been constructed, and
b. the last phase of the Dougherty Valley Developments has been built out.
24. Attorneys' Fees.
If legal action is necessary to enforce this agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to
reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees.
25. Powers.
The powers of this Agreement shall be exercised subject to the restrictions upon the
exercising of such powers by the County, as provided in Section 6509 of the Government
Code.
:26. Sole Agreement.
This Agreement is the sole agreement on the subject matters of this Agreement between
the parties. However, nothing contained herein shall supersede or amend any provision
of the Settlement Agreement.
Page 16 of 17
27. Signatures.
This Agreement may be signed in counterparts with the signature pages attached to form
a complete document.'
APPROVED BY:
COUNTY OF CONT OSTA
By: F177ed b un el
ti
Attest:
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
CITY OF SAN RAMON
By: Form approved by Counsel
Attest:
City Clerk
TOWN OF DANVILLE
By: Form approved by Counsel
Attest:
Town Clerk
gATrsnsEng\SCC JEPAA8
August 5,1998
Page 17 of 17
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
DATE: July 16, 1996
SUBJECT:. Set Date for Public Hearing to Form the Southern Contra Costa Fee Areas.
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
I. Recommended Action:
FIX August 6, 1996 at 10:15 or a public hearing to form the Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas
and DIRECT the Public Works Director to give notice of the hearing and to file a copy of the
Development Program Report for the proposed SCC Fee Areas with the Clerk of the Board in
accordance with Government Code Sections 65091 and 66484.
If. Financial lmaact:
The formation of the SCC JEPA Fee Areas will have no financial impact on the General Fund. The
funds collected will be deposited in a trust fund accounts specific to the improvements to be
funded by the SCC JEPA.
III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background:
The Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee Areas establishes a series of fees to finance the
improvements called for in the Settlement Agreement that are necessary to mitigate the impacts
of development within Dougherty Valley. On December 22, 1992, pursuant to Resolution 92/867,
the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the Dougherty Valley Specific Plan
which established a framework for a planned community OF 11,000 homes. Also on December
22, 1992, the Board of Supervisors approved an amendment to the General Plan ("GPA") to allow
urban uses in the Dougherty Valley, certified the final environmental impact report ("EIR"), and
as part of the EIR process, adopted certain "Findings" required under the California
Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") and adopted a mitigation moni ring and reporting program
("MMP").
Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: w
_RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
_RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
—APPROVE —OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
v UNANIMOUS(ABSENT )
AYES: NOES:
ABSENT: ABSTAIN:
HJB:ML:ds:eh
91ransengldslbol WoCCR
Originator: Public Works(TIE) I tel►�that this Is e true and caroct of
Contact Person:Martin Lysons,313-2295 a gra`Of LO994 i On#0
gate° "'sna.n"UM at �°
XrrEM
cc: M.Shiu, Deputy PW Director PHI
of#4 board
Community Development-G.Slusher
Building Inspection Department fpr
County Auditor-Controller
County Counsel
Public Works Accounting
Set Date for Public Hearing to Form the SCC Fee Areas
July 16, 1996
Page 2
111. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: (Cont.)
Because of their concerns about impacts from development in the Dougherty Valley, on January
21, 1993, San Ramon, Danville and the Cities of Walnut Creek and Pleasanton (collectively the
"Petitioner Cities") and certain non-governmental organizations including Alamo Improvement
Association, Sierra Club, Greenbelt Alliance, Preserve Area Ridgelands Committee, Save Our
Hills and Mount Diablo Audubon Association (collectively "Petitioner Non-Governmental
Organizations" or "Petitioner NGOs") initiated litigation against the County and the Dougherty
Valley Developers, asking the court to set aside the County's December 22, 1992 approvals of
the GPA and the Specific Plan, certification of the EIR and adoption of the Findings and the MMP.
This litigation ("Lawsuit") is entitled Town of Danville, et. al. V. County of Contra Costa et. al..
Case No. C 93-00231 (Contra Costa County Superior Court).
Consistent with the requirements of CEQA, a conference to discuss the settlement of the Lawsuit
was noticed by the County and held on March 3, 1993. Thereafter, commencing on July 19, 1993,
representatives of the County, the Petitioner Cities and the Dougherty Valley Developers have
met frequently to establish means by which certain concerns expressed by the Petitioner Cities
with respect to development within Dougherty Valley can be addressed. These discussions have
resulted in an agreement ("Settlement Agreement") between the County, San Ramon, Danville
and the Dougherty Valley Developers on certain principles to govern development in the
Dougherty Valley and a process and certain actions by which those principles will be
implemented.
The Settlement Agreement formalized many of the processes through which development within
Dougherty Valley will be governed. The Southern Contra Costa (SCC) Fee program is one such
process as it establishes a series of fees to finance the improvements called for in the Settlement
Agreement that are necessary to mitigate the impacts of development within Dougherty Valley.
The Dougherty Valley Fee (paid exclusively by development within Dougherty Valley for its fair
share of improvements) is one component. The SCC Sub-Regional Fee (paid by new
development in the region surrounding Dougherty Valley for its fair share of the improvements)
is another component.
In addition, in 1988, the voters of Contra Costa County passed Measure C, which required Local
Agencies to assess a fee on development to fund regional improvements. In 1987, the County,
Danville and San Ramon had entered into the Tassajara JEPA to collect fees (totaling in excess
of$15 million) on a region of intense development within the three jurisdictions, in order to fund
both local and regional road improvements. Besides the Dougherty Valley Fee and SCC Sub-
Regional Fee, the SCC JEPA also establishes a fee program to finance regional road
improvement projects. The SCC Regional Fee is the third and final component of the SCC Fee
Program and is estimated to collect in excess of$11 million dollars dedicated solely for regional
improvements on 1-680 in Contra Costa County.
IV. Consequences of Negative Action:
Failure to form the SCC Fee Areas will preclude the County from complying with the provisions
of the Settlement Agreement and Measure C.