The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 04191994 - TC.1 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE DATE: April 18, 1994 SUBJECT: The Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: APPROVE the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program with the following modifications: 1. Direct the Director of Public Works to update existing Areas of Benefit that include fees for the State Route 4 Bypass to remove the State Route 4 Bypass contribution. 2. Direct the Director of Public Works to revise the timing of fee collection for transportation mitigation fees as existing Areas of Benefit are updated. 3. For lots that have previously adopted traffic mitigation fees,the Transportation Committee recommends the Board consider the two following alternatives: 1. Provide no exemptions for payment of the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee for lots that have paid previously adopted traffic mitigation fees. 2. Exempt lots that have paid previously adopted traffic mitigation fees from payment of the Eastern Contra Costa Transportation Mitigation Fee. 4. Provide no exclusions for small projects as proposed by other agencies. Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE: i _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE 4 APPROVE —OTHER j �l�lGt� �� SIGNATURE(S): Gayle Bishop Tom Torlakson ACTION OF BOARD ON April 19 , 1994 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X The Board APPROVED Recommendations 1, 2, 4, and 5, and Item 2 of Recommendation No. 3 exempting lots that have paid previously adopted traffic=. mitigation fees from payment of the Eastern Contra Costa Transportation Mitigation Fee. Supervisor Bishop advised that she was voting no because believes there is a great need for regional fees. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AYES: 7T_1T 4:Z NOES: ABSENT:__ABSTAIN: i hereby certify that this'setrueatd*=nutecOpyof an action taken and entered on the minutes of the LT:eh Board of Suon the date shown. c:6018.t4 ATTESTED: / � /9 / 9 9 f PHIL BATCH OR,Clerk of fhe of Supervisors and County Administrator Orig. Div: Public Works (T/E) Contact: Lowell Tunison, Tel. 313-2382 ° ' cc: See page 3 l East County Sub-Regional Fee Program April 18, 1994 Page 2 I. Recommended Action: (Cont.) 5. Revise the boundaries to exclude certain areas within the spheres of influence of the City of Clayton and properties accessing the westerly terminus of Evora Road and request the Contra Costa Transportation Authority to legally describe the boundaries of the Regional Transportation Planning Committees. 11. Financigi Impact: No impact on the County's General Fund. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: On March 8, 1994 the Board of Supervisors opened the public hearing for the adoption of the Eastern Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee (ECCSRTMF). Based on a request from the Building Industry Association (BIA) and members of the Central County Regional Transportation Planning Committee, TRANSPAC, for modifications to the program, the Board continued the public hearing until April 12, 1994. The Board also directed the Transportation Committee to hear the concerns of those that appeared at the public hearing so that these concerns may be addressed in the ordinance that is to be adopted. At their March 14, 1994 meeting the Transportation Committee, heard the concerns of Guy Bjerke of the BIA, David Lennon, representing the Hofmann Company and Barbara Neustadter, staff to TRANSPAC. The following concerns were raised at the meeting: • Guy Bjerke outlined the BIA's role in developing this program and its importance to East County transportation. He expressed concern that it was not clear that the existing area of benefit (AOB) fees for the State Route 4 Bypass had been deleted. The BIA is concerned about the possibility of being double charged for the same facilities. The Transportation Committee directed staff to revise the ordinance to make it clear that payment of the subregional fee replaces the State Route 4 Bypass fee in the existing AOBs. • The BIA also requested that all AOB fees be paid at issuance of building permit rather than at final map approval. This is consistent with the other three agencies participating in the Sub-Regional Fee Program and typical of other jurisdictions in the area. The Transportation Committee expressed its desire that the ordinance be modified to collect the fee at issuance of building permit, and requested staff to analyze the impacts and bring back a recommendation. Staff has determined that collection at issuance of building permits is acceptable and the proposed ECCSRRTMF ordinance has been modified. This change will be made in the other Areas of Benefit as they are updated and revised. • David Lennon of the Hofmann Company requested that building permits on lots which are not vested but have paid the previously adopted lower fees for sub-regional transportation be exempt from the new higher fees. The Transportation Committee considered this and requested staff to check further. Staff has checked with the cities of Antioch and Brentwood who both intend to collect the higher fee where allowed by the Subdivision Map Act. To be consistent with the other jurisdictions, staff recommends that the County do the same. The Transportation Committee recommends that the Board consider two alternatives: 1) providing for no exemption since this is a new fee program or 2) providing an exemption for such lots. • Staff presented a request from the City of Antioch to include an exclusion for small builders. Staff explained that this was not possible under the provisions of the Subdivisions Map Act. The Committee's recommendation is to have no exclusions for building permits in the ECCSRTMF area. • Barbara Neustadter presented TRANSPAC's concerns regarding the boundaries of the ECCSRTMF area. Their concern is that the boundaries do not conform to the boundaries between the East, Central and Southwest County Regional Transportation Planning East County Sub-Regional Fee Program April 18, 1994 Page 3 III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: (Cont.) Committees of TRANSPLAN, TRANSPAC and SWAT. Staff indicated the rationale for the development of the fee boundaries was based on a nexus between improvements to the facilities in the program and the benefits to the properties that are the traffic shed for the fee area. The boundaries for the Regional Transportation Planning Committees (RTPC) are not legally defined which is required for a fee area. Barbara Neustadter indicated that TRANSPAC would be requesting the Transportation Authority establish fixed boundaries for the RTPC's. However, that may take some time to develop. The Transportation Committee recommended that the proposed boundaries of the ECCSRTMF be amended to exclude the Lesher property on Evora Road and areas in the sphere of influence of Clayton by reference in the ordinance. They also stated that they would consider a shift in the boundaries in the future if defined boundaries are adopted by the Transportation Authority. • Considering the above, the Transportation Committee recommends that the ECCSRTMF be adopted and that the action be taken in conjunction with the adoption of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement for establishment of the Authority to administer the fee program for the four agencies, City of Antioch, City of Brentwood, City of Pittsburg and Contra Costa County. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: If the ECCSRTMF is not adopted, existing current fees for the State Route 4 Bypass will remain in place and additional revenues sufficient to complete the first phase of State Route 4 Bypass as well as improvements to Buchanan Bypass and State Route 4 in eastern Contra Costa County will not be generated. This would have a negative effect on the implementation of the County's General Plan as well as mitigation of new growth in the East County area. cc: CCTA City of Antioch City of Brentwood City of Pittsburg G. Bjerke, BIA S. Goetz, Community Development D. Lennon, Hoffman Company B. Neustadter, TRANSPAC P. Roche, TRANSPLAN