Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08012000 - D3 TO: °Board of Supervisors f ; , Contra FROM: Supervisor John Giola, District 1 Costa Supervisor Mark DeSaulnler, District 4 County DATE: August 1, 2000 SUBJECT: Contra Costa County Smart Growth Action Plan SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDED ACTION CONSIDER and APPROVE the Contra Costa County Smart Growth Proposal as presented by Supervisors Gioia and DeSaulnier(Attachment A). ESTABLISH a Smart Growth Ad Hoc Committee composed of Supervisors Gioia and DeSaulnler. AUTHORIZE the Smart Growth Ad Hoc Committee to work with city representatives and the community to develop countywide smart growth goals and objectives and to plan a county-wide Smart Growth Summit in approximately 18 months at which these goals and objectives are approved for implementation,including possible placement on the ballot. AUTHORIZE the Contra Costa County Community Development Department to provide staff support to the Smart Growth Ad Hoc Committee and to work with the cities'planning staffs to provide additional support as needed. DIRECT the Smart Growth Ad Hoc Committee to make regular reports to the Board of its efforts. DIRECT the County Administrator to identify$50,000 to fund this effort. DIRECT the Smart Growth Ad Hoc committee to seek supplemental funding from local jurisdictions and from grants available for innovative work In the area of Smart growth planning. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE ACTION OF BOARD ON August 1 2000 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHERg SEE THE ATTACHED ADDENDUM FOR BOARD ACTION AND VOTE VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND UNANIMOUS(ABSENT_ _ CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact:Supervisor Giola(5101374-3231) ATTESTED r+Wu1_ W_ cc: Supervisor DeSaulnier(925/646-5763) PHIL.BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR ' DEPUTY, "- FISCAL IMPACT It is anticipated that the County will fund start up costs for this project by providing $50,000. Additional funding will be sought from the participating Jurisdictions and from grants given to smart growth planning initiatives. BACKGROUNDIREASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS Moving the County's urban limit line to,restrict development is an important first step towards achieving smart growth in Contra Costa County. However, we need to immediately take the next step to develop smart growth strategies which encourage good infill and revitalization to occur within the Urban Limit Line. These strategies reflect the need to responsibly manage our growth to preserve the quality of life for current and future generations, while assuring that we help address our County's affordable housing needs and jobs/housing Imbalance. Approving the Contra Costa Smart Growth Action Plan would allow the County, cities and community to work together to develop and implement an effective smart growth strategy. ADDENDUM TO ITEM D. 3 A August 1,2000 Agenda On this date,the Board of Supervisors considered the Smart Growth Action Plan as presented by Supervisors Mark DeSaulnier and John Gioia.(See attached Board order). Those present included Dennis Barry,Community Development Department Director,Patrick Roche,Community Development Department,and Silvano Marchesi,Chief Assistant County Counsel. The Board discussed the issues. Supervisor DeSaulnier inquired if the hearing was closed on this matter. Dennis Barry responded that it was not. Supervisor Gerber called for public comment,and the following people appeared to speak: Millie Greenberg,Mayor of Danville,674 Sheri Lane,Danville; Julie Pierce,Clayton City Councilmember,City County Relations Cte., 1526 Haviland Place,Clayton; John Dalrymple,Labor Council, 1333 Pine Street,Ste.E,Martinez; Evelyn Stivers,Greenbelt Alliance,Walnut Creek; Kathleen Nimr,Sierra Club,Green Party,Martinez; Kathy Lafferty,1344 Sherwood Drive,Concord; Debbi Landshoff,6016 Orchard Avenue,Sierra Club,Richmond; David Jameson,LAFCO,634 El Pintado Road,Danville;and Marcus O'Connell,3206 Esperanza Drive,Concord; Those desiring to speak having been heard,the Board continued to discuss the matter. Following the Board's discussion Supervisor DeSaulnier moved to: Adopt the recommended action; Direct that the Smart Growth Ad Hoc Committee meet with the City/County Relations Committee; Come back to the full Board with a timeline,a workplan and a budget to work on collaboratively with the cities in the next 60 days with the idea of a facilitated process;and Incorporate all of the comments that were presented to the Board today. Supervisor Gioia seconded the motion.There was no vote taken. After further discussion,Supervisor Gerber suggested modifying the City/County Relations Committee membership to include the members of the Smart Growth Ad Hoc Advisory Committee,Supervisors DeSaulnier and Gioia.Further,she suggested changing the wording in Recommendation#1,from,"Consider and Approve..."to"Consider..."(eiiminatins the ward Approve). Supervisor Gioia suggested modifying that language to,"Consider and Approve the process detailed in...". Supervisor Gerber agreed to the modification.There was no second. Supervisor DeSaulnier moved a subsequent motion,to accept the recommendations of Supervisors Gioia and Gerber for the language change;include that Supervisors Gioia and DeSaulnier go to the City/County Relations Committee meeting on August 2,2000,and the Mayor's Conference on August 3,2000,and return to the Board next week with a report on those discussions. Supervisor Uilkema seconded the motion. The vote was called and was as follows: AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA,UILKEMA,DeSAULNIER,CANCIAMILLA and GERBER NOES: NONE ABSENT. NONE ABSTAIN: NONE CONTRA COSTA SMART GROWTH ACTION PLAN SECTION 1. STATEMENT OF FINDINGS AND POLICY. A. California and Contra Costa County's long-term economic health depends, in part, on a change in our growth patterns -- to new forms of more sustainable development to expand wisely at the urban fringe, and to renewed economic growth and investment to revitalize existing communities, many of which have been left behind in the California economy. (California State Treasurer Smart Investments Report,June 1999) B. Re-investment in declining communities is essential to reverse the trend toward „two Californias", one in poverty and the other enjoying an economic boom. Present land use patterns reflect the growing separation between these two Californias. Our county and state cannot succeed in the long term with thriving, successful suburbs and troubled inner cities and older neighborhoods. (California State Treasurer Smart Investments Report, 1999) C. Stronger regional cooperation and planning is required to ensure that communities work cooperatively to foster sustainable growth goals. Many major public policy challenges facing our state and County, from transportation to employment, from affordable housing to preservation of open space, must be addressed from a regional perspective, as these problems transcend city and county boundaries. (California State Treasurer Smart Investments Report, June 2000) D. By the year 2005,the San Francisco Bay Area population is expected to grow by 450,000. Providing sufficient housing for this growth among all income groups is crucial if we are to maintain the region's social and economic vitality. (ABAG Regional Housing Needs Determination, June 22000). E. A recent study concluded that Contra. Costa County was the second least affordable county in the Bay Area for home purchases. Developing countywide strategies to develop more affordable housing is essential to Contra County's continued economic prosperity and quality of life. SECTION 2. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACTION. As an important first step toward achieving a smart growth strategy, the Board of Supervisors ('Board") has voted to move the Urban Limit Line ("ULL") to restrict development. The Board adopts this Smart Growth Action Pian to in order to begin working with city representatives and the community to achieve smart growth in Contra Costa County. SECTION 3. SMART GROWTH ACTION PLAN. The cities of Contra Costa County C'Cities") and Contra Costa County C'County") will work together over the next eighteen (18) months to develop countywide smart growth goals and objectives. This process will include significant community input and engagement. A countywide Smart Growth Summit will be held in approximately eighteen (18) to share each jurisdiction's work product and recommendations. At this Smart Growth Summit, countywide Smart Growth Goals and Objectives will be discussed and approved for implementation, including possible 1 placement on the ballot. The County, cities and the community will study and explore numerous smart growth strategies, including the following, during the next 18 months: A INVENTORY OF VACANT AND UNDER-UTILIZED LAND. Work with the City/County Relations Committee to complete the inventory of vacant and under-utilized land within the County that is appropriate for infill development. B. IDENTIFY TARGET AREAS AND STRATEGIES FOR INFILL. 1. Identify target areas where infill and revitalization/redevelopment efforts are desirable and appropriate, recognizing that such development relieves growth pressures to expand the ULL; and 2. Identify constraints (e.g.,regulatory obstacles, inadequate public facilities, fragmented land ownership, lack of neighborhood amenities) to development in target areas and develop comprehensive strategies for overcoming these constraints. C. REGIONAL AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS,_ JOBS/HOUSING BALANCE, AND LIVABLE W RS. 1. Attainment of Regional Housing Needs Goals. In order to ensure the availability of decent affordable housing for all income groups,the County and Cities will explore the development of policies which will enable each jurisdiction to meet its identified regional housing need goals as calculated by the Association of Bay Area Governments ("ABAG") and as required by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. These policies include areas where the County and Cities may cooperatively work together in developing and implementing policies to attain these housing need goals. 2. Attainment of Affordable Housing Goals. Explore the development of a"Smart Growth Affordable Housing Goals" in order to meet affordable housing goals as required by California state law. The Smart Growth Affordable Housing Goals would set a minimum requirement that a certain percent(such as 15% or 20%) of all newly approved housing units within any jurisdiction be affordable housing units. The Smart Growth Affordable Housing Coals may also include policies that encourage cities within a subregion to work together and with the County to achieve subregional affordable housing goals. 3. Jobs/Housing Balance. Explore the development of policies which cause each jurisdiction to attain their General Plan or ABAG goals with regard to improving the job/housing balance. 4. Livable Wages and Jobs. Explore the development of policies which help jurisdictions attract jobs which pay livable wages and enable their residents to purchase an average priced home. 2 C. REGIONAL PLANNING COORDINATION. Explore the development of strategies which encourage the County, Cities and special districts (water, sewer, school, park, etc) to voluntarily join together and enter into cooperative planning agreements which describe how the County, Cities and special districts will coordinate their planning activities, including the role and responsibilities of each entity with respect to the approval of new development and the infrastructure required to supply the new development. D. COORDINATED REGIONAL LAND USE PROBLEM SOLVING. Explore the development of coordinated regional planning and problem-solving processes to resolve land use issues and which include an opportunity for relevant state agencies, local governments, stakeholders and the community to be involved. E. TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS. Explore the development of a Transfer of Development Rights Program which allows development rights to be transferred from lots/parcels in one area to an area that that is targeted for infill and revitalization/redevelopment or is near transit stations. F. "CLEAR AND OBJECTIVE" APPROVAL STANDARDS. Explore how the County and Cities can develop new policies which establish "clear and objective" approval standards on applications for residential or economic development near transit stations or within areas designated for revitalization/ redevelopment. G. ESTABLISHMENT OF A LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRUST. Explore the establishment of a "Livable Communities Fee" to be assessed on development by the County and Cities. These fees would be deposited into a dedicated "Livable Communities Fund" and be used to fiend projects which: (1) clean up land for redevelopment or enhance the tax base and create jobs near existing housing, (2) enable communities to meet affordable and regional "fair share" housing goals through construction, development and renovation of affordable and senior housing, (3)promote innovative land use planning and design principles that encourage mixed use and infill development, (4) to promote economic revitalization in urban infill communities, or (5) to help fund transit and other transportation improvements which foster smart growth principles. As incentive to implement smart growth principles, this fund may be allocated to jurisdictions which are implementing smart growth strategies. H. ADOPTION OF THE URBAN LIMIT LINE BY THE CITIES. The Cities should devise a process to adopt the Urban Limit Line under Measure C-1990 as legally binding and enforceable in their respective jurisdictions. I. ADVISING LAFCO TO RESPECT SMART GROWTH PRINCIPLES Develop a policy which requires the Local Agency Formation Commission C'LAFCO")to respect and support the Smart Growth Goals and Objectives. 3 J. INVESTIGATION OF OTHER.SMART GROWTH STRATEGIES. Over the next eighteen (18) months, the Cities and County will explore other smart growth strategies to determine whether and how these strategies may be applicable and useful to their respective jurisdiction. Such other strategies include, but are not limited to, minimum density zoning in areas designated for revitalization/infill and transportation efficient land use strategies. SECTION 4. DEVELOPMENT OF STATE AND REGIONAL SMART GROWTH POLICIES. The County shall continue its leadership in working with the existing regional smart growth planning efforts including the Inter-Regional Partnership and the Regional Agencies' Smart Growth Strategy to develop regional smart growth strategies and model policies. Both these efforts have produced an approved and funded work plan ending simultaneously in 2002. The Board shall request the Contra Costa legislative delegation to introduce legislation in January 2001 to fiuther the goals and objectives of this Smart Growth Action Plan. 8/1/2000 4 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , Contra FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP Ceuta COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR y e, County DATE: AUGUST 1, 2000 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION NO. : 0/366 ADOPTING CONTRA COSTA COUNTY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GP#990001): POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE URBAN LIMIT LINE SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. ADOPT Resolution No. 2000/366 as the General Pian Amendment (GP#990001) for the set of boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line, tentatively approved on July 25, 2000, and the findings contained therein as the basis for the Board's action for the second of four consolidated amendments to the mandatory elements of the County General Plan in calendar year 2000 as permitted under law. 2. DIRECT the Community Development Department to post the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk, FISCAL IMPACT The costs associated with this General Plan Amendment Study are covered in the budget for the Community Development Department. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE � RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON Alt gx,,.Ai 7 n a,n APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED YLOTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND UNANIMOUS(ABSENT - - } CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT:. --ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN Contacts P.Roche,CDD-AP(925-335-1242) ATTESTED Aii gus t 1 - 200-0--m- cc: 00-0 _cc: Community Development Dept. PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF CAO SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMININISTRATOR County Counsel BY DEPUTY August 1,2000 Board of Supervisors File#GP990001 Page 2 BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION The background information on this matter is detailed in a report, dated July 24, 2000, to the Board of Supervisors on potential modifications to the Urban Limit Line (GP#990001). In summary, this report provides background, analysis, environmental review and recommendations from the County Planning Commission relating to potential modifications to the County Urban Limit Line. On July 24, 2000 and thereafter continued to July 25, 2000, the Board held a public hearing on the recommendations from the County Planning Commission as detailed in CPC Resolution 7-2000. After closing the public hearing, the Board declared its intent to approve a set of Urban Limit Line boundary modifications at several geographic locations and determined to consider final adoption of the General Plan Amendment at the August 1, 2000 meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Attached for the Board's consideration and possible adoption is Resolution No. 2000/366 to amend the General Plan to incorporate the set of boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line, tentatively approved on July 25, 2000, and the statement of findings transmitted herewith as the basis for the Board's action for the second of four consolidated amendments to the mandatory elements of the County General Plan in calendar year 20010 as permitted under law. Attachment(1) Resolution#20001366 DMB/PRta:boardorderRes.2000l336 Exhibit 'A' CKwftYJYOR 3'�* 5. `..,. 4 ...,f `�y.r�.i.iY• Ragi�Shaellne - Sc 4K-COO� ` CAH 5 , ' 4, *f Carquinez Strait a R,011i � pCar�riu�3/rezSead a S t ?R ( •"'y""'n' Maeiine "" j afire' " f Legend Contra Costa County lute 4 City limitsM z ------ City sphere of influence Ane(SOQ a Pam ,� �.� � ,��: �� � � �u � ------• Existing urban limit line(ULL) P ` 4r ' 3 .a, tri W EN Change to LILL gm , € Area Inside existing ULL ° h i s" Area inside existing ULL,to be removed under proposal R. std Area outside existing ULL o 4000 ft(approximate) Crockett Area (Proposal) Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors Action: 7/25/2000 Exhibit `B' art Cu afill f 34f, ,ta _ /78�r0l1■/S/fOV■�f!? e 4 �.. l�Kl�i Ridge W(A7 71NN! 4 Legend HI/M{/,,.*,� Sfoe 9 (HNIO* --•--- Contra Costa County fine iJahm ftt Mknai HWalk S& ■ City limits ------- City sphere of Influence line (Sol) -- --- Parks -- -� Existing urban limit line(ULL) `+mw Change to ULL Area inside existing ULL Area Inside existing ULL, to be removed under proposal Area outside existing ULL 0 5000 V��ZJ tt(approxlenate) Martinez Area (Proposal) Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors Action: 7/25/2000 Exhibit 'C' Mount Diablo State Pk nstors Rd Rd Legend ---- Contra Costa County line City limits ------ City sphere d irOuence line(Sol} — --- Parks Camp Barks I -'"— Existing urban limit line(ULL) Reserve Forces ■r m w Change to ULL TrakrrngArea .+'" , rasajm ck �a,,�• kagionar Area inside existing ULL Pk Area Inside existing ULL,to be removed under proposal Area outside existing ULL o 6000 ft(approximate) Tassajara Area (Watershed Option) plus the Sphere of Influence Option (coterminus with the eastern boundary of the Blackhawk community), north of Camino Tassajara Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors Action: 7/25/2000 Exhibit W ,GDircovrsa ,......... a g 1 ' Diamond Y -1 Wnes ' Regions! + itsew lit 1 Y t Lrrrwr...r...r� Legend 9 Contra Costa County line LCity limits City sphere of influence fine(501) Mt Diablo State --- Parks Park ■---- Existing urban limit Ane(ULL) Change to ULL (NA—Clayton Ranch to be removed from existing ULL) Area inside existing ULL Y- Area inside existing ULL,to be removed under Prop Y Area outside existing ULL 0 600()it(approximate) Clayton Manch Area (Proposal) Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors Action: 7/2512000 Exhibit 'E' INS Crilpps Island "- t Island browns island "' i s)i 8ra+ns Is/e»d 5hcve�e �tyn Legend �— �- Cama Costa County line - ...•....r City limits 1 -- --- C� ofirtRuenceline SOn l —. -- Parks -�- Existing urban limit One(ULL) eru t Diamond m r m Change to ULL f Alinas Area inside existing ULL i—"—'--t NO" Area inside existing ULL,to be PMS&o removed under alternate proposal Area outside existing ULL �000 rt(appmx1mate) Pittsburg Area (Alternate) Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors fiction: 7/25/2000 Exhibit 'F' Contra Lorna Regional Park 4 No# a Part Legend Marsh Creek Rd -- Contra Costa County line ■.r.r CRY limits ------ City sphere o(Influence line(S01) ( Parks L—` � Existing urban limit line(LILL) to s m Change to ULL ( Camp DMIO Rd Area inside existing L ILL ( ` Area inside existing ULL,to be _ removed under akernate proposal Area outside existing ULL ( L�wZJ R approximate) ——— Cowen stanch project boundary ( �/ Antioch (Proposal) Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors Action: 7/25/2000 Exhibit 'G' l a Hollarid Tract Rd Knightsen Deka Rd " Legend -•—.--Contra Costa County One ■..� City firnits ----- City sphere of influence fine(SOO ---- Parks E=xisting urban limit One(ULL) F -W1 Change to ULL Area inside existing ULL Chestrut St Area Iris a existsnqULLL,to be remounder prossl L Area outside existing ULL A I Marsh Creek Rd J`` 0 8000 R(approximate) Oakley (Alternate) and Veale Tract (Proposal) Urban Limit Line Modifications Board of Supervisors Action: 7/25/2000