Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05061986 - X.6 'TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS f FROM: Supervisor Tom Torlakson Contra Costa DATE: May 6 , 1986 County SUBJECT: REMAINING ISSUES REGARDING THE FORMATION OF AN EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDED ACTION: Direct the Community Development Department and County Counsel to prepare the final implementation ordinance for the formation of an East County Regional Planning Commission for hear- ing and adoption on June 3 , 1986 . Furthermore, to commence the recruitment process for appointments to the regional planning com- mission and ask that the Internal Operations Committee set a date in late May or the first week in June to screen applications and inter- view candidates. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The following are issues that remain regarding the formation of an East County Regional Planning Commission: Issue #1: The question has been raised as to the precise appointment procedure that would be utilized in appointing commissioners to the regional planning commission. The procedure should involve the Board of Supervisors ' Internal Operations Committee as the official body submitting a list of recommended appointments to the Board of Supervisors. The District Supervisor ' s Office would be responsible for the initial recruitment of applicants. The District Supervisor would collect all applications, review the and summarize any initial recommendations in a report that would go the Internal Operations Committee. Issue #2: Concern has been expressed regarding the outcome of the county-wide General Plan review process which is directed to conclude on December 31, 1987 . To consider the commission in light of any new policies that emerge from this process and to give it a necessary evaluation, a sunset date of June 1 , 1988 should be established. This would give the commission approximately two years of operation. The commission then would serve as a pilot project during this two-year operation. If there is a need for modification, change or elimination, this would be fully evaluated by the Board of Supervisors by June 1 , 1988. The cities and unincorporated communities would be consulted as to their reaction to the commission' s operation and ef- fectiveness. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) ACTION OF BOARD ON May 6. 1986 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X REFERRED to the Director of Community Development and County Counsel the issue of formation and implementation of an East County Regional Planning Commission. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS X 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 OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN, CC: Community Development Director ATTESTED G Apo County Counsel —x111 50helor. Clerk of the Bo -W-1 County Administrator Supavbm Aid Cov*Adfikiis dK Supervisor Torlakson M382/7-83 BY DEPUTY Regional Planning Commission May 6 , 1986 Page TWO Issue #3 : In the May 2 , 1986 letter from Karl Wandry to each of the three east county cities ' development services directors, he responded to the cities ' questions and concerns. These points should be attached to the records as guidelines for the formation of the East County Regional Planning Commission along with my March 11, 1986 report outlining details of the committee and the other report attached from the Community Development Department. In the May 2 memo, some additional points should be made in the response to the question (bottom of Page 2 ) , "Will the County consider Specific Plans adopted by a city within its Sphere of Influence before incorporation takes Formation of the East County place?" In the county' s response, the following additional points should be made: Add "fu`lly respect" to the first line to read: The County, as in the past, will in the future consider and fully respect adopted Specific Plans within a city' s Sphere of Influence. The following sentence should be added to the end of this paragraph: The county will also consider the city' s General Plan within the Sphere of Influence. Issue #4: The question of duplication or extra bureaucracy has been raised. It should be noted that the new regional commission will replace both East Diablo Planning Advisory Committee and the County Planning Commission on non-countywide issues (as previously outlined) . EDPAC will be dissolved upon the formation of the new regional commission. Finally, two other issues should be attached to the formation of the East County Regional Planning Commission: One, the East County Planning Commission will not deal with border issues or annexation issues or other issues that are the purview of LAFCO. Second, the East County Planning Commission will not deal with decisions on such transit items as the location of the BART stations which are the purview of the East County Transit Authority (Tri-Delta) . TT:gro CommunityHarvey E. Bragdon Contra DeJelopment C Director of Community Development Department Costa County Administration Building, North Wing County P.O. Box 951 Martinez,California 94553-0095 Phone: 372-2031 May 2, 1986 Mr. Raymond Vignola Development Services Director City of Antioch P.O. Box 130 Antioch, CA 94509 Dear Kpo. a: During the discussions on the formation of the proposed East County Region- al Planning Commission (ECRPC) proposed by Supervisor Torlakson, several questions were raised relative to the responsibilities and powers of the Commission relative to the planning function of each of the incorporated cities in the area: Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg. Based on the options currently being considered by the Board of Supervisors relative to the structure of the County Planning Agency, responses to the general questions follow: How would the area/regional commission(s) function relative to the cities and their area of responsibility? Responsibility for planning would remain as it is now, the cities would maintain responsibility for the planning function within the city limits and the County Commission would maintain responsibility for the unincorporated area. i What would be the working relationship between an area/regional commission and the County-wide Planning Commission? I The area/regional commission would be equal to the County-wide Commis- sion. Their individual responsibilities would be defined and differ- ent. When a County-wide issue had a particular impact on a particular area, the County-wide Commission could ask the area/regional commis- sion(s) to hold hearings and make recommendations to the County-wide . Commission. What would be the representation on the regional commissions and who will make the appointments? Raymond Vignola Date: May 2, 1986 East County Regional Planning Commission -2- The representation on each commission would be defined and appointed by the Board of Supervisors. City nominations, such as proposed by Supervisor Torlakson for East County, could be included in the Board's appointments. What would be the extent of the area from which a city could nominate a member? Each city's nomination area would include at least the incorporated city and its' approved Sphere of Influence. In some cases, a larger area could be used, such as a zip code area. In other instances some of the city Sphere of Influence may be split between an incorporated city and an unincorporated community. An example of the latter is illustrated by the proposed split in representation between West Pittsburg and Pittsburg for the ECRPC proposed by Supervisor Torlakson. In that case, the unincorporated community of West Pittsburg lies within the sphere of influence of the City of Pittsburg. Would a city be precluded from commenting on projects heard by the area/regional commission because of commission representation? No. The city would still have the ability to comment on projects independent of its membership on the commission. Would the establishment of the area/regional commissions preclude the Mayors' Conference from making recommendations relative to planning the Cities Sphere of Influence? No, these are independent issues. However, what the Mayors' Confer- ence and its subcommittees may do cannot be anticipated. Will the County consider Specific Plans adopted by a city within its' Sphere of Influence before incorporation takes place? The County, as in the past, will in the future consider adopted Specific Plans within a city's Sphere of Influence: In every case that comes to mind, a potential developer is referred to the involved city to discuss its plans, timetables, etc. for the project site. In every case to date, whatever development occurred has taken place, after annexation to the affected city. Reports to the Board of Supervisors describing the major options available relative to the organization of the County Planning Agency and the organ- ization of the ECRPC proposed by Supervisor Torlakson are included for your use. The Board of Supervisors will again consider the structure of the County Planning Agency at its May 6, 1986 meeting. Please contact me at 372-2031 if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, Karl L. Wandry, Deputy Director KW:gms pl :ECRPC.t5 . . Ediotoriai l Editorial . i DAILY LEDGER, .Antioch, Calif., Friday, February 21, 1986--page 9 Big step lor East County r he creation of a regional planning commission for East County is crucial to the orderly development of this area. The concept of area planning councils has been proven in other sections of Contra Costa County. Until the cities of Danville and San Ramon were formed, the San Ramon Valley Area Planning Com-. mission functioned as that area's main planning body. The residents of that valley found the area com- mission to be much more in tune with the needs of that section than was the county Planning Commis- sion in Martinez. Members of the area commis- sions, chosen from the residents of that section of the county, provide for a better grass-roots representa- tion for their fellow citizens. One of the problems the San Ra- mon Valley group encountered af- ter the incorporation of the two cities in that,area was that Dan- ville and San Ramon were no long-. er represented on the board. hose planning a regional commission for East County have taken that into account and are suggesting representatives from the area's cities be included on the board. . The need for such a body is evi- dent. We in East County are on the brink of a period of exceptional growthin which it is crucial that our voices be those heard when de- cisions must be made. The logic of having East County ��`'� residents responsible for their ar- ea's future isundeniable. h r At present a task force,of com- munity leaders is working on a }-f proposal for the county Board of Supervisors on this commission. ' �' '�� /V We urge the residents and lead- ers eaders of the East County to put'aside petty, provincial differences and join together in support of the cre- ation of this important representa- �1 tive body. r-- The destiny of East County should be decided here and not in , Martinez.