Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04191994 - H.3 CORRECTED COPY. PLEASE I� DESTROY PREVIOUS ISSUE 1r• ' WITH ORDINANCE. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: March 8, 1994 SUBJECT: Implementation of the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee Project No. 0676-6P4057, CP# 94-03 RESOLUTION NO. 94/ 245 SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: A. It is recommended that the Board take the following actions: ' 1. ADOPT and APPROVE the Development Program Report pertaining to the Eastern Contra Costa Sub=Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee. 2. DETERMINE that the project is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Article 5, Section 15061(b)(1) 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 attached Development Program. Report and the attached ordinance. 7. DIRECT the Director of Public Works and Auditor/Controller to establish a trust fund for the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Region I Transportation Mitigation Fee and that the Treasurer shall investment said mon' with interest to accrue in the trust fund account. - Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON —"/—__ ' I cl) 199r,E. APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER_ VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1/ UNANIMOUS (ABSENT X AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: NW/RT:rt c:BORES.t1 I hereby certify thatthie Is attueaide reeteopl►d an action taken and entered on the mtnutee o�t0�e Orig. Div: Public Works (T/E) Board of SuvewisorSOn th Oft ShOm Contact: Rob Tavenier, Tel. 313-2256 ATTESTED:._. '—':� r 4. t994 PHIL SAT MEAL Clerk the eclard cc: M. Shiu, Deputy PW Director of superviaasarta a"AdmWddmW V. Germany, Design, PW ` Community Developmentey h Public Works Accounting County Auditor-Controller Treasurer-Tax Collector RESOLUTION NO. 94/245 East Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee March 8, 1994 Page 2 I. Recommended Action: (Cont.) 8. DIRECT the Public Works Department and Department of Community Development to review the fee schedule every January 1 the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee is in effect, 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 Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee area, and to report those amendments to the Public Works Director as necessary to facilitate updating of the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee, and to make recommendations to the Board. 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 Eastern, Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee. 11. RESOLVE that it is the intention of the Board that the caps and limits set forth in! Attachment 2 to the East Contra Costa Regional Fee and Financing Authority Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement not be exceeded by funds from the developer fees. f2. RESOLVE that it is the intention of the Board that the Agency aggressively pursue outside funding sources, such as federal and state monies, to finance the roadway improvement to the maximum extent possible. 13. RESOLVE that it is the intention of the Board that this program be the sole fee program for addressing regional traffic improvements in the East County area. B. It is recommended that the Board ADOPT the attached ordinance, which creates the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee, and ordains the following: Traffic Mitigation Fees (Ordinance No. 94 -4 5 1. Adopt traffic mitigation fees, as recommended in the Development Program Report. 2. Adjust the fee schedule every January 1 that the Area of Benefit is in effect, to account for the affects of inflation and that at no time will the fee schedule be increased at a rate of more that 5 % per year. 11. Financial Impact: The total estimated cost of the road improvement projects identified in the Program Development Report for the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee, is approximately $403 million. The proposed projects however, will only be partially funded by the fee program. Adoption of the Area of Benefit will generate approximately $189 million for road improvement projects, when all the fees are collected by the year 2010 target date. The remaining project costs will be funded by local, state, or federal grants, Measure C funds, or Gas Tax revenues. No General Fund monies will be used. East Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee March 8, 1994 Page 3 III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: The Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee area is being formed to fulfill the obligation of the County under the proposed Joint Powers Agreement. The Joint Powers Agreement will require each participant to implement a uniform fee to finance construction of three projects of regional significance. The participants in the Joint Powers Agreement are the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, and Pittsburg and Contra Costa County. The' three projects are to construct the proposed State Route 4 Bypass, the proposed Buchanan Bypass, and improve the safety and capacity of State Route 4 through Pittsburg and Antioch. The State Route 4 Bypass has been identified as a necessary route for development of east county allowed under the current General Plan. This roadway will alleviate congestion that currently exists along State Route 4 and other major arterials in the area such as Lone Tree Way and Hillcrest Avenue. The alignment of the proposed State Route 4 Bypass is consistent with the planned transportation corridor from the Brentwood area to Interstate 580 to the south. The Buchanan Bypass project is sponsored by the City of Pittsburg as an alternative route to the existing Buchanan Road and State Route 4. Construction of this bypass would help alleviate. congestion on State Route 4 through Pittsburg, and the existing Buchanan Road. The improvements to State Route 4 through Antioch and Pittsburg are necessary to alleviate congestion and improve safety. Improvements include additional lanes and improved on and off ramps. Government Code Section 66484 and Division 913, Title 9 of the Contra Costa Countyi Ordinance Code provide for assessing and collecting fees for bridge and/or major thoroughfare construction within a designated area of benefit and as a condition of approval of a final! subdivision map or as a condition of issuing a building permit. The Public Works Director and Director of Community Development have completed a Development Program Report for the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee,which was filed with the Clerk of the Board. Notice of the hearing was duly given in accordance with Government Code Sections 54986, 65091, 66016, and 66484. The Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee has been determined to be in compliance with the General Plans of the cities of Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg, and Contra Costa County and is exempt from CEQA because it is not a project as defined in CEQA guidelines Section 15378. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: Failure to approve the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee will result in significant funding shortfalls for the three projects contained in this fee program. This would delay the construction of the facilities for many years until another funding source is secured. ORDINANCE NO. 94 -4�_ (Adoption of Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fees) The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County ordains as follows: SECTION I. SUMMARY. This ordinance provides for the adoption of fees to be used for bridge and major thoroughfare improvements within the Eastern Contra Costa Sub- Regional Transportation Mitigation Area of Benefit. SECTION II. AUTHORITY. This ordinance is enacted, in part, pursuant to Government Code Sections 66484 and Division 913, Title 9, of the Contra Costa Count}�A Ordinance Code. SECTION III. NOTICE AND HEARING. This ordinance was adopted pursuant to the procedure set forth in Government Code Sections 54986, 65091, 66016, 66017(a) and 66484 and Division 913, Title 9, of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code, and all required notices have been properly given and public hearing held. SECTION IV. FEE ADOPTION. The following fees are hereby adopted for the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Area of Benefit to fund the bridge and major thoroughfare improvements described in the Development Program Report on file with the Clerk of the Board, and shall be levied and collected pursuant to the above authorities: Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fees: Land Uses Fee Single Family Residential $4,200 per Dwelling Unit Multiple Family Residential $3,375 per Dwelling Unit Commercial $0.55 per Square Foot of Gross Floor Area Office $0.57 per Square Foot of Gross Floor Area Industrial $0.30 per Square Foot of Gross Floor Area Other $4,200 per peak hour trip The fees shall be payable as specified in Section 913-4.204 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code. The fees payable under this ordinance shall be in addition to fees payable for the following existing areas of benefit: -1- ORDINANCE NO. 94 - 45 1. Bethel Island Regional Area of Benefit 2. Discovery Bay Area of Benefit 3. Oakley/North Brentwood Area of Benefit 4. East County Regional Area of Benefit (including the East County Sub-Area, the Pittsburg/Antioch Sub-Area and the Marsh Creek Sub-Area) 5. Bay Point Area of Benefit (formerly West Pittsburg Area of Benefit) However,where fees are paid for one of the above areas of benefit, the fees payable under this ordinance shall be reduced in an amount not exceeding that shown in Exhibit B attached to this ordinance. In addition, the following shall be exempt from the fees levied under this ordinance: (1) any developments required under conditions of approval to construct certain off-site road improvements in lieu of fee payment; and (2) any unimproved subdivision lots for which fees for one of the above areas of benefit were previously paid at the time of map"' recordation. SECTION V. FEE AREA. The fees set forth in this ordinance shall apply to all property described in Exhibit A attached hereto. SECTION VI. PURPOSE AND USE OF FEES. The purpose of the fees described in this ordinance is to generate funds to finance improvements to certain bridges and major thoroughfares in the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Area of Benefit. The fees will be used to finance the road improvements listed in the Development Program Report. As discussed in more detail in said 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 bridges and major thoroughfares in the East County area, thus creating a need to expand, extend or improve existing bridges and major thoroughfares and a need to construct new bridges and major thoroughfares to mitigate adverse traffic and infrastructure impacts that would otherwise result from such development projects. SECTION VII. 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 VIII. REVIEW AND INCREASE OF FEES. Project cost estimates shall be reviewed January 1 of every year that this ordinance is in effect. The fee schedule shall be adjusted annually to account for inflation using the State of California Construction Cost Index, as published annually by the California Department of Transportation. Such adjustment,shall not require further notice or public hearing. At no time will the fee schedule be increased at a rate of more than 5% per year due to inflation. -2- ORDINANCE NO. 94 - 45 SECTION DC DATE. This ordinance shall take effect 60 days after passage but shall not become operative until the Public Works Department files a statement with the Clerk of the Board certifying that similar fees have been adopted by the Cities of Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg. Within 15 days of passage, this ordinance shall be published once, with the names of the Supervisors voting for and against it, in the Brentwood News, Antioch Ledger and the Contra Costa Times, all newspapers 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 April 19. 1994 , 1994 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Bishop NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN: None ATTEST: Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By Deputy ✓ Board Chair -3- ORDINANCE NO. 94 -45 Boundary Description East County Area of Benefit EXHIBIT "A" The eastern portion of Contra Costa County, California, bounded on the north, east, and south by the boundary of said county, and bounded on the west by the following described line: Beginning in Suisun Bay on the boundary of Contra Costa County at the northern prolongation of the west line of Section 5, Township 2 North, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence from the Point of Beginning, along said prolongation and west lines of Sections 5 and 8 (T2N, R1W), southerly 14,225 feet, more or less, to the west quarter comer of said Section 8; thence along the midsection line of Section 8, easterly 5,280.06 feet, more or less, to the east quarter comer of said Section 8; thence along the east lines of Sections 8 and 17 (T2N, R1 W), southerly 6,430 feet, more or less, to the southwest comer of PARCEL "A" of Subdivision MS 9-83 filed January 20, 1984 in Book 109 at page 10, Parcel Maps of said county, also being an angle point on the boundary of "CONCORD NAVAL WEAPONS STATION ANNEXATION" to the City of Concord certified November 1, 1966; thence along said annexation boundary as follows: (1) southeasterly 8,670.76 feet to the north line of Section 27 (T2N, R1W), (2) southeasterly 10,641.44 feet, (3) southerly 3,015.62 feet, (4) southerly 1,478.05 feet, and (5) southwesterly 817.33 feet to the south line of U.S.A. Explosive Safety Zone recorded December 27, 1977 in Volume 8645 at page 682, Official Records of said county, and shown on the Record of Survey filed January 8, 1985 in Book 76 at page 12, Licensed Surveyors Maps of said county; thence leaving said annexation boundary and following the boundary of said safety zone (also being the boundary of"BRINTON ANNEXATION" to the City of Concord certified July 15, 1987) as follows: (1) easterly 1,398.01 feet, (2) easterly 660.00 feet, (3) northerly 646.64 feet and (4) easterly 659.60 feet, to the west line of Section 1 (TIN, R1W); thence leaving the boundary of said safety zone, along said west line, southerly 2,582 feet, more or less, to the southeast comer of"BRINTON ANNEXATION" on the north right of way line of Kirker Pass Road (also being the northeast comer of "BERNSTEIN ANNEXATION" to the City of Concord certified March 29, 1972); thence continuing along the west line of Section 1 (also being the east line of "BERNSTEIN ANNEXATION"), southerly 2,300 feet, more or less, to the southwest comer of said Section 1 on the north line of "OAKHURST COUNTRY CLUB AREA ANNEXATION"to the City of Clayton certified November 30, 1987; thence leaving the boundary of the City of Concord and following the boundary of said City of Clayton annexation as follows: (1) along the south line of Section 1, easterly 5,254.46 feet, to the northeast comer of Section 12 (T1 N, R1 W) on Mount Diablo Meridian, (2) along said meridian, southerly 10,353.95 feet, to the northeast comer of Section 24 (TIN. R1 W), (3) along the north line of Section 24, westerly 1,406.17 feet, to the northeast right of way line of Marsh Creek Road shown on the Record of Survey filed September 29, 1966 in Book 45 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 2, (4) along said right of way Gne in a general southeasterly direction 1,526.21 feet to Mount Diablo Meridian, and (5)along said meridian, southerly 936.04 feet,to the most southeastern comer of said annexation; thence leaving said annexation boundary, continuing along said meridian, southerly 72.75 feet, to the northwest comer of"OAKWOOD ANNEXATION"to the City of Clayton certified August 16, 1990;thence along the boundary of "OAKWOOD ANNEXATION" (also being the boundary of Subdivision 7259 "Oakwood"filed December 12, 1990 in Book 354 of Maps at page 5)as follows: (1)easterly 339.92 1 feet, (2) in a general northeasterly direction 339.14 feet, (3) in a general southerly direction 618.45 feet, (4) southwesterly 632.77 feet, and (5) westerly 215.95 feet to the southwest comer of "OAKWOOD ANNEXATION" on Mount Diablo Meridian; thence leaving said annexation boundary, along said meridian, southerly 13,854.07 feet, to National Geodetic Survey Station"Mount Diablo;" thence continuing along said meridian, southerly 15,840 feet, more or less, to the southwest comer of Section 18 (TIS, R1 E); thence along the south lines of Sections 18, 17, 16, 15 and 14 (T1 S, R1 E), easterly 26,373 feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of Section 24 (T1 S, R1 E); thence along the west lines of Sections 24 and 25 (TIS, RIE), southerly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the southwest comer of said Section 25; thence along the south line of Section 25 (T1 S. R1 E) and the south line of Section 30 (T1 S. R2E), easterly 8,575 feet, more or less, to the southwest right of way line of Morgan Territory Road shown on the map of Subdivision MS 18.86 filed February 28, 1992 In Book 157 of Parcel Maps at page 43; thence along said southwest line In a general southeasterly direction 686 feet, more or less, to the southwestern prolongation of the northwest line of Subdivision MS 31.78 filed December 31, 1980 in Book 91 of Parcel Maps at page 44; thence along said prolongation and northwest line, northeasterly 2,255.06 feet, to the west line of Section 29 (T1 S, R2E); thence along said west line, southerly 1,020.02 feet,to the southwest comer of Section 29; thence along the south lines of Sections 29 and 28 (T1 S, R2E), easterly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northwest comer of Section 34, (TIS, R2E); thence along the west line of Section 34 (T1 S, R2E) and the west lines of Sections 3 and 10 (T2S, R2E), southerly 14, 960 feet, more or less, to the boundary of Contra Costa County. EXCLUDING THEREFROM: 1. Those portions lying within the boundaries of incorporated cities. 2. The sphere of influence for the City of Clayton as adopted by the Local Agency Formation Commision and as shown in Exhibit 1-4, page 1-9 of the Clayton General Plan adopted July 17, 1985. LH:jlg:rbt c1ex:ECounty.AOB 3/31194 4/18/94 2 EXHIBIT B CREDITS FOR EXISTING FEES Osld RV. Brentwood Area of Benefit • Current Amount of current fee Proposed ECCSRTMF New Fee Fee to be credited ECCSRTMF Adjustment Schedule Single Family $7,863.00 $1,726.00 $4,200.00 $2,474.00 $10,337.00 Multi Family $6,578.00 $1,553.00 $3,375.00 $1,822.00 $8,400.00 Commercial $4.69 $1.55 $0.55 ($1.00) $3.69 Office " '• $0.57 $0.57 $0.57 Industrial $2.85 $1.04 $0.30 ($0.74) $2.11 •• No property in this Area of Benefit is zoned 'Office' therefore no fee exists, 'Office' projects would up pay a local traffic impact fee based upon ITE trip generation rates at $6,037/peak hour trip. Discovery Bay Area of Benefit • Current Amount of current fee Proposed ECCSRTMF New Fee Fee to be credited ECCSRTMF Adjustment Schedule ISinale Family $2,625.00 $1,730.00 $4,200.00 $2,470.00 $5,095.00 East County Regional Area of Benefit Current Amount of current fee Proposed ECCSRTMF New Fee Fee to be credited ECCSRTMF Adjustment Schedule Single Family $1,994.00 $345.00 $4,200.00 $3,855.00 $5,849.00 Multi Family $1,596.00 $276.00 $3,375.00 $3,099.00 $4,695.00 Commercial $4.99 $0.86 $0.55 ($0.31) $4.68 Office $3.19 $0.55 $0.57 $0.02 $3.21 Industrial $1.40 $0.24 $0.30 $0.06 $1.46 Bethel(stand Regional Area of Benefit Current Amount of current fee Proposed ECCSRTMF New Fee Fee to be credited ECCSRTMF Adjustment Schedule Single Family $3,347.00 $0.00 $4,200.00 $4,200.00 $7,547.00 Multi Family $2,680.00 $0.00 $3,375.00 $3,375.00 $6,055.00 Commercial $8.37 $0.00 $0.55 $0.55 $8.92 Office $5.36 $0.00 $0.57 $0.57 $5.93 industrial $2.23 $0.00 $0.30 $0.30 $2.53 Bay Point Area of Benefit Iformerly West PittsburgArea of Benefit) Current Amount of current fee Proposed ECCSRTMF New Fee Fee to be credited ECCSRTMF Adjustment Schedule Single Family $2,892.00 $2,892.00 $4,200.00 $1,308.00 $4,200.00 Mufti Family $2,321.00 $2,321.00 $3,375.00 $1,054.00 $3,375.00 Commercial $7.25 $0.00 $0.55 $0.55 $7.80 Office $4.63 $0.00 $0.57 $0.57 $5.20 industrial $2.03 $0.00 $0.30 $0.30 $2.33 Light lndustriai $3.18 $0.00 $0.30 $0.30 $3.48 All Other Land Uses $2,888.00 $2,886.00 $4,200.00 $1,312.00 $4,200.00 •The credit in these areas of benefit shall be based upon the portion of the ares of benefit fee that was expressly allocated for the State Route 4 Bypass (Deft Expressway) 2 DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT FOR THE EASTERN CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE Prepared By and For the: Contra Costa County Public Works Department March 8, 1994 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE BACKGROUND PROJECTS GENERAL LOCATION FEE AREA BOUNDARY PURPOSE OF THE FEE USE OF THE FEE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEED FOR PROJECTS AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT CALCULATION OF FEES ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES COLLECTION OF FEES INTEREST ON FEES IN LIEU DEDICATION LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 EAST COUNTY REGION PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT 2005 TABLE 2 FEE CALCULATION i LIST OF EXHIBITS EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF FEE AREA -i- DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT FOR THE EASTERN CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE This Development Program Report outlines the concept, methodology, and procedure for implementing the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (ECCSRTMF). The purpose of this report is to outline an adequate funding mechanism to plan, design and construct three regional transportation projects, hereinafter referred to as the "Projects": the State Route 4 "Bypass" (SR4BP), the Buchanan Bypass, and improvements to State Route 4 (SR4) between Bailey Road in Pittsburg and the junction of SR4 and State Route 160 (SR160) east of Antioch. The SR48P was previously known as the "Delta Expressway". The Growth Management Plan (GMP) mandated by the voters in Contra Costa when Measure C was passed in 1988 stipulates that new growth should provide infrastructure required to service the respective growth. In 1990, AB471 was passed which requires every urban and suburban County to adopt a Congestion Management Program (CMP). Adoption of this fee will assist the County in complying with both of thise requirements. The remainder of this report explains the means of providing funds for the design and construction of road improvements to serve planned growth within the general East County area. Several areas in the County have already implemented a fee program for the SR46P project. For example, the fees collected in the Oakley/North Brentwood Area of Benefit currently include $1,726 per single family unit allotted for the SR4BP project. These existing fees would continue to be collected. However, to avoid double payment, the proposed ECCSRTMF of$4,200/dwelling unit would be reduced by the amount of any existing fees allocated for the SR46P project. Thus, in the case of a single family residential development located within the Oakley/North Brentwood Area of Benefit, the ECCSRTMF would be$2,474/dwelling unit($4,200-$1,726);the remaining$1,726 would be paid as part of the Oakley/North Brentwood Area of Benefit fee. When existing fees are updated in the Oakley/North Brentwood Area of Benefit and other similar areas, the portion allocated to the SR4BP project will be eliminated and the full amount of the ECCSRTMF would then be payable within those areas. This Development Program Report is required by the County Board of Supervisors' Policy 1 on Bridge Crossings and Major Thoroughfare Fees (adopted July 17, 1979) which implements Division 913 of the County Ordinance Code and applies to areas in unincorporated Contra Costa County. This Development Program Report is also in fulfillment of Sections 66484 of the State Subdivision Map Act. The report may also be used by the cities for adoption of the appropriate action to impose the uniform fee. BACKGROUND The existing SR4 between SR160 and Walnut Boulevard extends through the downtown areas of the city of Brentwood and the community of Oakley. The existing SR4 through these communities is an at-grade limited capacity arterial, located adjacent to schools, shopping, and numerous residences with direct access to the roadway. Thus, regional traffic, which includes a significant truck volume, is mixed with local traffic. Low speeds and heavy cross traffic on local roads significantly limit the lane capacity (number of cars per lane) on SR4. It would be impractical to add enough lanes on SR4 to accommodate future traffic volumes. Any widening would require substantial acquisition of properties adjacent to the roadway which would be a significant negative impact on the character of the towns, as well as an exorbitant financial burden. However, if road improvements are not constructed in conjunction with the currently planned growth, the capacity of the existing roadway will be exceeded, forcing levels of service below acceptable standards. The existing Buchanan Road in Pittsburg is significantly congested due to commuter traffic accessing central county over Kirker Pass Road. There is no opportunity to widen this roadway due to right of way constraints. Construction of the bypass would significantly reduce traffic on the existing Buchanan Road and reduce commute times. State Route 4 through Pittsburg and Antioch is extremely congested with sub-standard on and off ramps. Improvements to this segment of roadway would reduce congestion as mandated by the county wide CMP. Improvements would include widening for additional capacity, HOV lanes and for transit in the median. PROJECTS 1. The SR46P is a proposed limited access highway 9.3 miles long, which would shift regional traffic away from the town centers to the "Bypass" road. This would preserve the character of these communities while providing infrastructure necessary for planned growth. Consequently, congestion would be reduced and through trucks would have a route away from existing schools, businesses and residences. In addition, the SR413P would alleviate the burden on local roads which would provide the road capacity to accommodate planned growth outside the immediate 2 vicinity of the project. For example, trips originating from Bethel Island would be able to travel westerly and southerly on existing SR4 or other local roads which would otherwise be congested. Other examples are local roads such as Hillcrest Avenue and Lone Tree Way in the City of Antioch where heavy traffic could be efficiently shifted to the SR4BP. These types of examples are typical of the entire region. Consequently, the SR48P would be a major corridor which would benefit the entire east county region. 2. The Buchanan Bypass project is located south of the Pittsburg City limits. It will parallel the existing Buchanan Road which is currently over capacity. The existing roadway is one lane in each direction with numerous residences accessing directly onto the travelled way. The proposed Buchanan Bypass will begin near the current intersection of Buchanan Road and Somersville Road and connect to Kirker Pass Road approximately three fourths of a mile south of the existing Buchanan Road. This "Bypass" will improve traffic flow on SR4 by providing a less congested route to Kirker Pass Road which leads to employment centers in Central County. 3. The improvements to SR4 between Bailey Road and the SR4/SR 160 junction will extend the improvements currently being constructed over the Willow Pass Grade. The improvements will be constructed in useable and fundable segments as funds become available. Typical improvements include additional lanes(HOV and mixed flow), improved median barrier, wider medians to accommodate transit and improved ramps. GENERAL LOCATION Figure 1 shows the general location of the Fee Area in eastern Contra Costa County. Figure 2 shows the general location of the Projects. FEE AREA BOUNDARY The fee area will include the unincorporated areas of eastern Contra Costa County, including those areas adjacent to the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, and Pittsburg and those areas within the existing Discovery Bay, Oakley/North Brentwood, Bethel Island, Bay Point and East County Areas of Benefit. It is anticipated that the cities of Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg will form similar fee areas within their incorporated areas. A legal description of the fee area is attached as Exhibit "A". 3 cP 3� g x '1 Q cog cr- r J ro`- y � � >� � � +tom•� �S G O Q f p W rJa y f 90 a S+a+n o too NtU t!N O O N V 4 t y ! O ¢ OO N p. .r Q � v- 0 00 90 O` � O lid v •` +'� d O '' � 4 m M � o r- p Y fX 11� s 6 \ {r- m Y N � � �"• � r Y •� , 0- r � a d a CA As ��,,`►'' 1 � ti � � � x'35 ad •\ as Wu tp W i 2 1 � j � f PURPOSE OF THE FEE The purpose of this fee program is to generate monies, through the adoption of development fees, that will fund the Projects as shown below. The Projects will improve safety and provide additional capacity, and possibly demand on existing roads. By adoption of this fee, the roadway system can keep pace with the planned growth in the area to provide for the region's transportation needs and improve infrastructure contained in the circulation element of the General Plans of Antioch, Brentwood, Pittsburg, and Contra Costa County. The funds collected will also be used as matches required to obtain State and/or Federal funds. USE OF THE FEE The fee will be used to pay for administration of the fee area and for the planning, environmental documentation, design, acquisition of right of way, and construction of the Projects. These development fees will finance roadway improvements which will meet the minimum traffic level of service requirements and safety demands. The Projects will be constructed to Caltrans highway design standards. The SR4BP is proposed to be built in two phases: Phase 1, a two-lane highway with six at grade intersections; and Phase 2, a four-lane highway from Balfour Road, northerly, with two grade separated interchanges and four at-grade intersections. Figure 2 shows the preliminary alignment of the SR413P. The proposed fees will also finance construction of a new interchange at the existing SR4/SR160 Junction in Antioch. This new interchange will be a full three directional interchange which includes east and west movements on SR4, north and south movements on SR4 Bypass, and north and south movements on SR160. The Buchanan Bypass is proposed to be built in two phases: Phase 1 will be a two way two lane facility; Phase 2 will be a four lane facility with median. Improvements to existing SR4 will be constructed in usable segments as funds become available. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT The Projects are necessary for the safety and the capacity of the road network serving the East County area as determined by planned growth depicted in the General Plans for Contra Costa County, Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg. The road network outlined in these documents show the Projects as major transportation corridors. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NEED FOR PROJECTS AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT A trip generation factor has been designated for each of the various land uses outlined in this Development Program Report. These factors were determined utilizing the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation Manual, 4th Edition and 6 results of the East County Traffic Model. The traffic model indicates that non-residential development may reduce the impact on the Projects by creating a better employment/housing balance. As a result, the proposed fee is directly related to traffic generated by each particular land use with non-residential trip generation factors significantly reduced to approximately one tenth of the standard values in the ITE manual. GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP The Projects are included in the circulation element of the General Plans of Contra Costa County, Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg, and are designated major arterials, expressways or freeways. DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL The development potential for the fee area was estimated using the City of Antioch, Brentwood, Pittsburg and Contra Costa County General Plans for projected growth to the year 2005. The Projects will be funded by development fees uniformly assessed over the entire East County region per dwelling unit or per square foot of gross floor area. For example, the fee assessed to a new single family home would be the same whether it was located in Antioch, Brentwood, Pittsburg or unincorporated East County area. A summary of the estimated development potential for the fee area is shown in Table 1. 7 Table 1 East County Projected Development 2005 Town or City Single Mufti- Commercial Office Industrial Family Family (SF) (SF) (SF) (#DU) (#DU) Antioch. 14,879 1,170 4,248,778 757,944 3,012,174 Brentwood 8,928 1,428 813,390 19,000 1,879,240 Pittsburg 8,500 2,065 4,608,072 0 9,082,854 Bay Point 83 150 80,000 0 600,000 Bethel Island 2,775 648 379,463 0 0 Discovery Bay 409 226 154,638 0 0 Oakley 6,177 1,755 425,892 0 1,142,820 Byron 191 298 0 0 0 Knightsen 9 0 0 0 0 Other 200 0 0 0 509,652 =TOTAL 42,151 7,740 10,710,233 776,944 16,226,740 8 FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY This fee program will fund the Projects as follows: PROJECT ECCSRTMF COMMITMENT TOTAL COST ESTIMATE SR4BP $75 million $150 million Buchanan Bypass $4 million $19 million SR4 Improvements $110 million $234 million $189 million $403 million Development fees appear to be the most viable source at this time due to the location of the Projects, service to growth, and the incredible demand on government funds to improve road infrastructure throughout the entire State. The above estimates include construction, right of way, environmental documentation, planning, engineering, administration, and contingencies. The cost of the Projects is uniformly distributed per each dwelling unit or each square foot of gross floor area of building space throughout the entire East County area. BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT The portion of the cost of the Projects to be funded by this fee program has been distributed between the individual land use categories based on daily trip generation. The trip generation factors assigned to non-residential land uses such as commercial, office, and industrial have been reduced below industry standards to acknowledge the potential trip reduction which may occur by provision of an employment-housing balance. CALCULATION OF FEES As previously mentioned, the fees are assessed to the various land use categories in proportion to the number of daily trips generated. The proposed fee rates as shown below are rounded off from the calculated values. The fee calculation is shown in Table 2. PROPOSED FEE RATES Single Family Residential $4,200/dwelling unit Multi-Family Residential $3,375/dwelling unit Commercial $0.55/square foot Office $0.67/square foot Industrial $0.30/square foot 9 d a0WAl- 00 m o0Lf) (or) o 0 6uic000 O O N M M* 61* � N C CL 0 0 CD o o 00 0 = - - aactW) ) o OGoo rn oocoo` r- rn Goo GOO 44 O O NN6% e9 oNi r � 6F+ �� to fH ER CL ZR OR o 'C 1� v- I- NNO O f' � N N C c V C 00 11 II •O d O p, tANQ) NMO 0 )i � r r M r r' CA LO d c t/1 O E a .� U � O o o � � o o N 000000 /O� :L, W N Y w 0000 0 0 0 0 V cc COE0 cc RV — 0000 J m U. Fz 4w Owa a Fa C Pt N Cf p" 0. NN C C lv t%t.t- N ' W 1C N O O 0, E r Gs y WE2 a) li E z Q E a O in � UcQ H 10 ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES Project cost estimates will be reviewed annually by analyzing the previous year's change in the California Construction Costindex as published annually by California State Department of Transportation. Appropriate adjustments in the fees may then be established by ordinance or resolution. The fee shall not increase more than 5% in any given year due to inflation. COLLECTION OF FEES Fees shall be collected prior to the filing of the final subdivision map, in accordance with Government Code Section 66007 and Section 9134.202 of Title 9 (Subdivisions) of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code, to assure that funds are available to construct needed road improvements before newly generated traffic exceeds the capacity of the existing facilities. For those properties that have approved tentative maps prior to the adoption of the ECCSRTMF, and for developments which do not require filing of subdivision maps, the fee will be collected when the building permit is issued in accordance with Section 9134.204 of Title 9 (Subdivisions). Fees collected will be deposited in an interest bearing trust fund account. INTEREST ON FEES The interest accrued on the fees collected shall accumulate in the trust fund account and shall be used for purpose of administration of the fee area and for the planning, environmental documentation, design, acquisition of right of way, and construction of the Projects IN LIEU DEDICATION A development may be required to construct, or dedicate right of way for, a portion of the Projects. In such a case the developer may be eligible to receive credit or reimbursement. The developer should contact the Public Works Department prior to the commencement of construction. RBT/MH:eh/pe h:wp51\otherleastco Jee\ReporU1 ' 11 Boundary Description East County Area of Benefit EXHIBIT "A" The eastern portion of Contra Costa County, California, bounded on the north, east, and south by the boundary of said county, and bounded on the west by the following described line: Beginning in Suisun Bay on the boundary of Contra Costa County at the northern prolongation of the west line of Section 5, Township 2 North, Range 1 West, Mount Diablo Meridian; thence from the Point of Beginning, along said prolongation and west lines of Sections 5 and 8 (T2N, R1 W)., southerly 11,500 feet, more or less, to the north right of way line of Contra Costa Canal, as said right of way is shown on map C240A of the Department of Interior Bureau of Reclamation, Central Valley Project - Calif., Delta Division, Contra Costa Canal, Station 1251+99.57 to 1282+99.88; thencealong said canal right of way in a general westerly, southerly, and southeasterly direction 13,920 feet, more or less, to the most northern corner of"CONCORD NAVAL WEAPONS STATION ANNEXATION" to the City of Concord certified November 1, 1966; thence along said annexation boundary as follows: (1) continuing along said canal right of way in a general southeasterly direction 2,465.77 feet to an angle point thereon, (2) crossing a portion of said canal, southeasterly 174.11 feet, to the south right of way of said canal, (3) along said canal right of way in a general southeasterly direction 2,985.70 feet to an angle point thereon, (4) crossing a portion of said canal, southeasterly 100.00 feet, to an angle point on said canal right of way, (5) along said canal right of way southeasterly 399.90 feet, (6) leaving said canal right of way in a general southeasterly direction 1,382.33 feet to the south right of way line of State Highway 4, (7) in a general easterly direction 2,020.40 feet to the east right of way line of Willow Pass Road, (8) northerly 597.13 feet, (9) in a general northeasterly direction 2,920.24 feet to the southwest corner of PARCEL"A" of Subdivision MS 9-83 filed January 20, 1984 in Book 109 at page 10, Parcel Maps of said county, (10) southeasterly 8,670.76 feet to the north line of Section 27 (T2N, R1 W), (11) southeasterly 10,641.44 feet, (12) southerly 3,015.62 feet, (13) southerly 1,478.05 feet, and (14) southwesterly 817.33 feet to the south line of U.S.A. Explosive Safety Zone recorded December 27, 1977 in Volume 8645 at page 682, Official Records of said county, and shown on the Record of Survey filed January 8, 1985 in Book 76 at page 12, Licensed Surveyors Maps of said county; thence leaving said annexation boundary and following the boundary of said safety zone (also being the boundary of "BRINTON ANNEXATION' to the City of Concord certified July 15, 1987) as follows: (1) easterly 1,398.01 feet, (2) easterly 660.00 feet, (3) northerly 646.64 feet and (4) easterly 659.60 feet, to the west line of Section 1 (T1 N, R1 W); thence leaving the boundary of said safety zone, along said section line, southerly 2,582 feet, more or less, to the southeast corner of"BRINTON ANNEXATION'on the north right of way line of Kirker Pass Road (also being the northeast corner of "BERNSTEIN ANNEXATION' to the City of Concord certified March 29, 1972; thence continuing along the west line of Section 1 (also being the east line of"BERNSTEIN ANNEXATION'), southerly 2,300 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of said Section 1 on the north line of"OAKHURST COUNTRY CLUB AREA ANNEXATION' to the City of Clayton certified November 30, 1987; thence leaving the boundary of the City of Concord and following the boundary of said City of Clayton annexation as follows: (1) along the south line of Section 1, easterly 5,254.46 feet, to the northeast corner of Section 12 (TIN, R1 W) on Mount Diablo Meridian, (2) along said meridian, southerly 10,353.95 feet, 1 to the northeast corner of Section 24 (T1 N, R1 W), (3) along the north line of Section 24, westerly 1,406.17 feet, to the northeast right of way line of Marsh Creek Road shown on the Record of Survey filed September 29, 1966 in Book 45 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 2, (4) along said right of way line in a general southeasterly direction 1,526.21 feet to Mount Diablo Meridian, and (5) along said meridian, southerly 936.04 feet, to the most southeastern corner of said annexation; thence leaving said annexation boundary, continuing along said meridian, southerly 72.75 feet, to the northwest corner of"OAKWOOD ANNEXATION"to the City of Clayton certified August 16, 1990; thence along the boundary of"OAKWOOD ANNEXATION' (also being the boundary of Subdivision 7259 "Oakwood" filed December 12, 1990 in Book 354 of Maps at page 5) as follows: (1) easterly 339.92 feet, (2) in a general northeasterly direction 339.14 feet, (3) in a general southerly direction 618.45 feet, (4) southwesterly 632.77 feet, and (5) westerly 215.95 feet to the southwest corner of "OAKWOOD ANNEXATION" on Mount Diablo Meridian; thence leaving said annexation boundary, along said meridian, southerly 13,854.07 feet, to National Geodetic Survey Station "Mount Diablo;" thence continuing along said meridian, southerly 15,840 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of Section 18 (T1 S, R1 E); thence along the south lines of Sections 18, 17, 16, 15 and 14 (T1 S, R1 E), easterly 26,373 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Section 24 (Ti S, R1 E); thence along the west lines of Sections 24 and 25 (T1 S, R1 E), southerly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the southwest corner of Section 25; thence along the south lines of said Section 25 and Section 30 (T1 S, R2E), easterly 8,575 feet, more or less, to the southwest right of way line of Morgan Territory Road shown on.the map of Subdivision MS 18-86 filed February 28, 1992 in Book 157 of Parcel Maps at page 43; thence along said southwest line in a general southeasterly direction 686 feet, more or less, to the southwestern prolongation of the northwest line of Subdivision MS 31-78 filed December 31, 1980 in Book 91 of Parcel Maps at page 44; thence along said prolongation and northwest line, northeasterly 2,255.06 feet, to the west line of Section 29 (T1 S, R2E); thence along said west line, southerly 1,020.02 feet, to the southwest corner of Section 29; thence along the south lines of Sections 29 and 28 (T1 S, R2E), easterly 10,560 feet, more or less, to the northwest corner of Section 34, (T1 S, R2E); thence along the west line of Section 34 and the west lines of Sections 3 and 10 (T2S, R2E), southerly 14, 960 feet, more or less, to the boundary of Contra Costa County. EXCLUDING THEREFROM: Those portions lying within the boundaries of incorporated cities. LH:jlg c\ex:ECounty.AOB 2/23/94 2