Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10221985 - IO.2 TO: BOARD OF SUPEASORS • Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa DATE: October 14 , 1985 County SUBJECT: Agreement Regarding Flood Control Planning SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge report of Internal Operations Committee and remove this item as a referral to our Committee. BACKGROUND: On March 5 , 1985, the Board of Supervisors asked our Committee to explore whether the flood control planning and engineering division should be included in the newly created Community Development Department. Our Committee reported on this item initially on April 30, 1985 recommending that the Director of Community Development and Public Works Director develop a Memorandum of Understanding regarding how issues of common concern to the two departments in the area of flood control planning will be handled in the future. The two departments have developed the attached June 26, 1985 memo which identifies and clarifies the responsibility for a number of functions between the two departments. Under the section on "Land Development" procedures relating to flood control planning are identified. We met with the Director of Community Development and Public Works Director on October 14 , 1985 . Both Directors and the Assistant Public Works Director for Flood Control agreed that the agreements outlined in the June 26 memo are working well. Community Development is sending most development applications to the Flood Control District and they, in turn, comment directly to the Community Development Department. Flood Control believes that almost all conditions that they have recommended be attached to development applications have been agreed to by Community Development. Those collect and convey exceptions that have been granted have been justified in the view of Flood Control. Our Committee expresses one concern which is directed to the Community Development Department. We believe that it is important that applicants be fully aware of the implications of various flood control conditions since they can render a CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOM NDATIO OF BOARD COMMITTEE X APPROVE OER -� IW-%�- c e SIGNATURES) Tom Torl akson Tom Powers ACTION OF BOARD ON October 22, 1987 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD County Administrator OF SUPERVISORS ON/THE �DATE SHOWN. CC: Director of Community Development ATTESTED Public Works Director -- - -------- - - - Flood Control Div. PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382/7-83 BY 4 , DEPUTY Page 2 development application no longer financially feasible. Developers should be made aware of this as early in the process as possible. We have even suggested to Community Development that development applications be denied as premature rather than granting an application with conditions which will cost enormous sums of money and result in appeals throughout the development process. . Based on the discussion we had with the Director of Community Development and the Public Works Director, we do not believe any further action by the Board is required at this time. ea PUBLIC TnORES DEPA1Z0fflrrr CONTRA COSTA COUNTY DATE: June 26, 1985 TO: Anthony Dehaesus, Community Development Director FKH: J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director SaBJECr: Interaction between the Community De a ent Department and the Public Works Department The purpose of this memo is to define areas of concern and areas of responsi- bility in the interaction between our two departments, and the role each department should play in the processes of land development, transportation planning and service areas. After you have had a chance to review this mend, I strongly recommend a meeting between ourselves and other top level staff to resolve any areas of disagreement, any areas which I have neglected to address, and any unanswered questions. For the sake of simplicity I have broken the memo into three general areas, as defined above—land,development, transportation planning and service areas. Before addressing questions I should advise you regarding steps I have - --- taken, or expect to take, to restructure the Public Works Department as a result of the formation of the Community Development Department. Public Works staff on the 4th floor, formerly referred to as .the Land Development Division, have been redesignated as the Engineering Services Division. Dave Jewett remains their division head, and he is reporting directly to me. The 4th floor Records Section, and the 5th floor Base Mapping Section which previously reported to Bart Gilbert have been reassigned to Dave Jewett. We anticipate relocating the Base Mapping Section to the 4th floor. Public Works on the 5th floor is therefore a computer and its staff, Traffic Engineering and the remnants,,of the old Transportation Planning Division. Until we are able to relocate-'the remnants of the Transportation Planning Division to Glacier Drive, we are referring to then as the Road Projects Division. In accordance with our agreement, Maurice Shiu is supervising both your Transportation Planning Section and my Road Projects Division and reports directly to me for the latter. As soon as we are able to relocate Road Projects and Traffic Engineering personnel to Glacier Drive, I intend to merge the Road Projects staff with the Design portion of our Design/Con- struction Division to form a new division which will be referred to as the Design Division: This Design Division will handle both road and flood control design.. ; o a 2 vl o LAND DEVELOPMENT The Flood Control District will provide the same services to the Camnunity Development Department which they provide to cities. In the past, the cost of this service was charged against the Land Development program budget in the amount of approximately $24,000 per year. The District does not charge the cities for this service, and therefore we do not intend to charge the Community Development Department either. Of primary interest to the Flood Control District are the major and secondary channels, as well as drainage facilities in established or planned drainage entities such as Flood Control zones and drainage areas. To assist you in determining these areas of interest, the Flood Control District is preparing updated maps of the County's major and secondary channels, watershed boundary lines and drainage entities. Using USGS quad sheets, we are also developing detailed information and delineation of creeks and watersheds, as well as specific areas which have problems of their own. Along with the maps we are preparing information which will describe each area, its characteristics, and our recanmendations for approaching the drainage problems. With the help of these documents we expect that Community Development staff will be able to handle all routine drainage conditions and requirements. We will be responsible for constantly monitoring and updating the information and maps. For roads, we will also provide you with maps indicating areas of special interest to the Public Works Department. In general, these areas will consist of established or eminent road fee areas where it is important that we closely monitor development activity in order to manage the implementation of the fee related facilities and areas where heavy, continued construction traffic can be expected to destroy the existing roadway. We wish to be involved in the review process in the following manner: 1. Review of all environmental assessments and environmental impact reports for regional drainage impacts. We do not see a need for involvement in the review of these documents for road purposes, since your transportation planning section should provide that function. We will, however, be available for advice and consultation in the road area to the extent requested by your transportation planning section. We expect the Community Development Department to recatmend mitigation measures to address the problems of inadequate road facilities and the destruction of existing roadways through heavy continuous construction traffic. Developments in proposed road fee areas must carry their fair share of the anticipated future road improvements. 2. Review for drainage purposes all development applications involving property along major and secondary waterways, or in established or planned drainage entities as 'defined on the previously mentioned maps to be furnished. 3 3. Review for traffic operations and safety all office carmercial-industrial applications and residential applications in excess of ten units. The purpose of this review will be to check driveway and street intersection locations for operational safety, proximity to public street intersec- tions and driveways to other major traffic generators, location of proposed median breaks, and necessity for traffic control devices, street lighting requirements and intersection sight distance. 4. Review for information purposes only all applications for development within areas of road interest as defined on the- previously referenced maps to be furnished. 5. Recormrended "conditions of approval" and your staff report to be sent to the Public Works Department simultaneously with the distribution which you make to the developer, other agencies, zoning administrator, and the planning com�niss ions. 6. Copies of all zoning administrator and planning commission agendas to be distributed to the Public Works Department as soon as available. 7. A copy of the final "conditions of approval" shall be sent to the Public Works Department for use in review of the improvement plans and parcel or final map. 8. The Public Works Department will continue to microfilm all improvement plans, parcel maps, and f inal maps, and distribute copies as we did prior to the creation of the Community Development Department. 9. To the extent that developments conform to the ordinance code, the Public Works Department has very few concerns. We are, however, greatly concerned with exceptions to the ordinance code--particularly as they relate to drainage or operational safety of the road system. We would therefore greatly appreciate it if your staff would discuss any proposed exceptions to determine if we are, in fact, concerned and' if so if there is same reasonable solution to the problem which would mitigate our concern. TRANSPORTATION PLAMIM The division of responsibility for the functions previously handled by the Public Works Transportation Planning Division is somewhat more complex. The County Administrator's staff handled the problem by first determining that transportation planning would go to Community Development, then determining which staff were principally involved in the transportation planning function, and then taking all of the functions which that staff performed and indicating those functions be transferred to the Community Development Department. In general, I have no quarrel with the results of that exercise except as to ' the decision made concerning road fee areas. I do feel, however, that it is appropriate to try and better define where our respective areas of responsi- bility lie, both in general terms and to the extent possible, specific terms. • J 4 " ` In the most general terms possible, I believe that Community Development should be responsible for transportation planning and the Public Works Department should be responsible for implementation--including design and construction--as well as operations. Transportation planning would consist of all long-range street, road and highway planning in the forms of the the Countywide transportation plan, areawide transportation studies, and the development of general plan circulation elements. All non-road related transportation activities are in their entirety the responsibility of Community Development. These include bus transit, paratransit, and transpor- tation systems management in all of its various forms. This includes the acquisition of, and long range planning for, the utilization of the San Ramon branch line of the Southern Pacific Railway. It also includes the possible acquisition of, and utilization of, the east-west Sante Fe tracks in the probable event that the merger with the Southern-Pacific Railroad results in the abandonment of their parallel line. The Community Development Department shall also be responsible for the County role in the development of the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP) and State Transporta- tion Improvement Plan (STIP) . In its implementation role the Public Works Department shall be responsible for the development of individual projects, including environmental documen- tation, alternatives analysis, community liaison, and liaison with other project developers such as Caltrans during the implementation of a freeway project. The Public Works Department shall also be responsible for develop- ment of funding for local roads to include gasoline taxes and application to the various grant programs such as Community Development Block Grants, Federal Aid Urban, Federal Aid Secondary, Bridge Replacement and High Hazard and Safety. We understand that if a County Transportation Commission is formed the priority determination for Federal Aid Urban funding will most likely be transferred to that entity and their staff. The Public Works Department will also handle abandonments, the pavement management system, preparation of the road budget, assessment districts, the Assessment District Screening Committee, the Condemnation of the Assessment District Screening Committee, and the Underground Utility District Committee. Two areas which have always required a great deal of coordination and- cooperation between our staffs, and which will continue to require such, are precise alignment studies and the development of road fee areas. 1. Precise alignment studies is a function which was left in the Public Works Department, and I believe rightly so. The planning for the basic alignment, number of lanes, and other general characteristics is a proper function of the transportation planning section of the Community Development Department. Calculating the precise alignment of the road--in other words, determining which side of an existing road is to receive the widening, the appropriate curve radii grades, and other engineering aspects to meet appropriate safety criteria, and the descriptions and platting of parcels of right of way which are needed-- are all engineering functions which closely relate to implementation. 5 ,. 2. Development of road fee areas was placed in the Community Development Department, because the people who were transferred to Community Development were handling that function for the Public Works Department. The development of road fee areas is a process of identifying needed road projects in a given area, and creating the necessary funding mechanism to finance those projects. As such it is both an implementa- tion and local road financing activity, and I believe it belongs in the Public Works Department for lead direction purposes. If you disagree with this then we should discuss it with Phil Batchelor. There are a number of committees, commissions and other meetings which the Public Works Department has regularly attended in the area of transportation and roads. I have attached a list of these entitled "Transportation Cammit- tees Regularly Attended by Public Works Department." I see the responsibility for covering these cannittees to be split as follows. (If I show it going to the Community Development Department, that does not mean you have to attend--only that Public Works Department will not be covering it.) At the State level, Cammuni.ty Development should cover the California Transportation Canmission, the Paratransit Coordinating Ccmmittee, the County Supervisors Association of California's Transportation Committee, and Californians for Better Transportation. The Public Works Department will cover the County Engineers Association's Transportation Canmittee. The latter committee has traditionally dealt mainly in the areas of oversized trucks and transportation funding. They do not get involved in programs such as the RTIP and STIP. At the Regional level, Community Development Department should cover the Metropolitan Transportation Canaission, the MPC Transit Operator Coordinating Committee, the MTC Work Program Subcommittee, the MTC Grant Review Subcanmittee, the MIC I-580/I-680 Corridor Study Policy Steering Committee, and the I-580/I-680 Corridor Study Technical Advisory Committee. ' The Public Works Department will staff the MTC Regional Technical- Advisory echnicalAdvisory Catmittee. However, your department may wish to consider sending someone also. While their membership is made up of the Public Works Director of each county in the nine county Bay Area region, plus one city Public Works Director from each county, their area of coverage and discussions overlaps both of our responsibilities. They spend a lot of time discussing pavement management and pavement deterioration, as well as gas taxes and other local road funding mechanisms, but they also put out their information to counties on the RTIP and STIP process through this committee. Public Works will staff the MTC Pavement Management Subcommittee, which is a small subomnittee of pavement management technicians which are helping to design a local agency pavement management system. I will also continue to represent Contra Costa County on the Bay Area Coalition for Transportation, which is a small group whose membership is rather tenuous at the moment, that exists to promote an increase in the gasoline tax or other local road funding mechanisms. .6 All committees and other entities listed under "Countywide" and "Local" will be the responsibility of the Cammunity Development Department, with the exception of the Urban Systems Technical Advisory Committee, which is another name for the City-County Engineers Association, which deals almost entirely in day-to-day public works issues. I would, however, reocMend that engineers from your transportation planning section consider attending the City-County Engineers meetings as well. SERVICE AREAS With the reassignment of Diane Katofsky fram Public Works to Community Development, it was agreed that the County Service Area coordination function, which Don Freitas has been doing, would be transferred to the Community Development with Diane--although it was understood that most likely Dennis Franzen, and not Diane,'would be handling the function. In reality, we have 21 County Service Areas which the Public Works Department has provided staffing for, and only some of these are appropriately transferred to the Community Development Department. I am attaching a list of these 21 County Service Areas which provides information as to their location, advisory committees, budget, and services provided. I propose that these Service Areas be divided between our departments as follows: 1. County,Service Area M-1, the Delta Ferry Authority. I understand that this Service Area was on Don's list for transfer to your Department. - If you want it, that's great. However, I believe that it more appropriately belongs within the Public Works Department. The Ferry Service is considered to be an extension of the County road system, and for that reason is funded out of the County road budget. 2. County Service Areas M-3, M-7, M-12, M-13, M-14, M-21 and M-22 all provide only street lighting services, and as such their administration should remain within the Public Works Department where Leroy Vukad is currently tasked with their administration. 3. County Service Areas M-8, M-16, M-17, M-20, M-23, LIB-11, P-1 and all of the R Service Areas provide park and recreation services, and it is appropriate that they be transferred to the Community Development Department. Four of these Service Areas, M-8, M-16, M-20 and. M-23 provide street lighting among their services. However, we are working on the establishment of a single, Countywide lighting district, and if we are successful in that endeavor that district will remove the lighting function frau these four Service Areas. 4. LL-2 is a lighting and landscaping assessment district, and therefore should be retained within Public Works and administered by Dave Jewett, as it has been in the past. 5. Transfer of the administrative responsibility frau the Public Works Department to -the Community Development Department, for the items listed under #3 above, shall be assumed effective July 1, 1985. 7 l - While I tried to think of everything, I an sure I have overlooked several items which need to be addressed so that nothing falls through a crack. There may also be some info_rmtion or processes with which you disagree. In any event, I would like to meet with you to discuss the contents of this memo as soon as you are available. JM:djh PW.CD.workdiv.t6 cc: Supervisor Tom Powers Supervisor Nancy Fanden Supervisor Bob Schroder Supervisor Sunne McPeak Supervisor Tom Torlakson Phil Batchelor Bart Gilbert Milt Kubicek✓ Cliff Hansen Dave Jewett Maurice Shiu