HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04151997 - D3 D.3
Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa
.711
FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD County
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS � ��y
HARVEY E. BRAGDON
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: APRIL 15, 1997
SUBJECT: WEST CONTRA COSTA SUBREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) 6 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Accept a joint staff report from the Community Development
Department and Public Works Department which will review the
following matters:
a) A proposed Ordinance establishing the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of
Benefit;
b) Development Program Report for the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee, prepared in
accordance with the Board of Supervisors ' Policy on
Bridges and Thoroughfares;
C) Nexus Study for the West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee Program prepared for West
Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committties C TAC) ;
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE<�
r, / 4
777 �'v
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON _April 15, 1997 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the
above matter is CONTINUED to May 20 , 1997 , at 1 : 45 p .m . in the
Board Chambers .
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT - - - - TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
ATTESTED April 15, 1997
cc: Irma Anderson, Chair, WCCTAC PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Public Works Department THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND COUITY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program
April 15 , 1997
Page 2
RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
d) Proposed amendments to WCCTAC Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreements to include the fee program as an objective;
e) A proposed Master Cooperative Agreement with the Contra
Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) , WCCTAC, and local
jurisdictions establishing terms for remitting fee
revenue to CCTA for development and construction of the
transportation facilities described in the ordinance.
2 . Open the public hearing on an ordinance adopting a West Contra
Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of
Benefit;
3 . Continue the public hearing on the proposed Ordinance to the
Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, May 20, 1997 , and
await comments from other WCCTAC member jurisdictions on the
proposed subregional transportation mitigation program.
FISCAL IMPACT
No impact to the County's General Fund.
Adoption of the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation
Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit will generate funds to be used
solely for the improvements under the State Route 4 West Freeway
Gap Closure Project, as described in the Development Program
Report. The total estimated cost for the Phase I, SR-4 West Freeway
Gap Closure Project is $65 million. Although Measure C funds, and
State/Federal transportation funding grants will be relied upon for
project funding, it is anticipated that approximately $4 . 1 million
will be contributed toward project funding from the proposed West
Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee, consisting
of elected officials representing the cities of Hercules, Pinole,
San Pablo, Richmond, and El Cerrito, the Contra Costa County Board
of Supervisors, and the Board of Directors for both AC Transit and
BART, have spent the last year developing the proposed West Contra
Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program. This
proposal is in response to Measure C-1988, which while establishing
a i cent sales for Contra Costa transportation project and
programs, also included a requirement that " . a program of
regional traffic mitigation fees, assessments, or other
mitigations, as appropriate, be adopted to fund regional and/or
subregional transportation projects, as determined in the
comprehensive transportation plan of the Contra Costa
Transportation Authority. " During 1996, the Board of Supervisors
took a number of actions in support of the WCCTAC proposal, based
on recommendations from Supervisor Rogers working in conjunction
with the Board's Transportation Committee.
General Concepts of the West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Program:
■ The transportation mitigation fee program would augment
funding for the Phase I, State Route 4 West Freeway Gap
Closure Project (between Cummings Skyway and I-80) , raising
approximately $ 4 . 1 million toward the project ' s $65 million
cost, and, in addition, it would provide approximately $1
million to improve parking and access at the El Cerrito Plaza
BART Station and enhance intermodal connections at the
Richmond BART Station;
West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program
April 15, 1997
Page 3
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
■ The fee would raise approximately $5. 1 million in revenue over
a thirteen year period (1997-2010) based on the following
potential fee schedule:
LAND USE CATEGORY FEE
single family residential $700. 00 per new unit
multi-family residential $560. 00 per new unit
retail . 20 cents per sf.
office . 20 cents per sf.
industrial . 20 cents per sf.
other land uses $150. 00 per trip
■ Local jurisdictions will be responsible for collecting the fee
at issuance of the building permit and all fee revenue would
be remitted to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority,
serving as the lead or sponsoring agency for the project(s) ;
■ WCCTAC member jurisdictions would enter into a Master
Cooperative Agreement with CCTA establishing the terms and
conditions for remitting fee revenue to CCTA for development
and construction of the State Route 4 West Freeway Gap Closure
Project. In addition, the WCCTAC Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement would be amended to include the fee program as an
objective.
Development Program Report:
A Development Program Report, has been prepared by the Community
Development Department and Public Works Department in accordance
with the Board of Supervisors' Policy on Bridge Crossings and Major
Thoroughfares (adopted July 17, 1979) , which outlines the concept,
methodology, and procedure for implementing the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee. See the attachment
marked as Exhibit "B" : Development Program Report.
Nexus study:
A nexus study was conducted on behalf of WCCTAC in accordance with
AB 1600 (now codified as Govt. Code Sec. 66000-66003) which
examined the relationship of projected growth in West County to the
demand for new or expanded transportation facilities. It was done
in order to meet the requirement that an enacting body establish a
reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost
of the facility (or portion thereof) to be funded by the fee.
In the nexus study prepared for WCCTAC it was determined through
traffic projection studies that 38% of future year 2010 traffic
forecasted to travel on State Route 4 West could be attributed to
new development in West County. See attachment marked as Exhibit
"C" : Nexus Study for more details.
Proposed County AOB ordinance:
The attached Draft Ordinance, marked as Exhibit "A, " has been
prepared with the assistance of County Counsel to conform to both
state law and adopted County policy for establishing a fee program
for a designated Area of Benefit.
The Subdivision Map Act is the statute enabling the Board of
Supervisors to impose fees to mitigate impacts of new development
on the transportation system. Since the Subdivision Map Act limits
these impact fees to bridges and major thoroughfares, the County' s
draft Ordinance does not included transit projects mentioned in the
WCCTAC Nexus Study and WCCTAC ' s version of the ordinance.
West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program
April 15, 1997
Page 4
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
Interagency Agreements:
As previously mentioned, WCCTAC member jurisdictions would enter
into a Master Cooperative Agreement with CCTA establishing the
terms and conditions for remitting fee revenue to CCTA for
development and construction of the State Route 4 West Freeway Gap
Closure Project. Additionally, the WCCTAC Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement (JEPA) would be amended to include the fee program as an
objective. These interagency agreements are attached marked as
Exhibits "D": Draft amendments to WCCTAC JEPA and "E" : Draft Master
Cooperative Agreement between CCTA and WCCTAC Jurisdictions
Rey Issues/Next Steps:
Legal counsel for the other WCCTAC member jurisdictions are
currently reviewing a draft ordinance (WCCTAC version) , a master
cooperative agreement with the OCTA, and amendments to the WCCTAC
JEPA. It is anticipated that these jurisdictions will initiate a
public hearing process, similar to one already initiated by the
County, during the month of May with a target for adoption of an
ordinance before June 30, 1997 .
In reviewing the WCCTAC proposal, the Office of County Counsel
identified four main concerns (for more details see Exhibit marked
as "F" : 3/24/97 memorandum from County Counsel to the Community
Development Department) :
1. Contra Costa County must adopt in form and substance an
ordinance which conforms to the legal authorities granted to
the County under Subdivision Map. The Draft Ordinance in
Exhibit "A" : revises the WCCTAC proposal to meet these
requirements.
2 . There are many provisions in the WCCTAC version of the
ordinance which are not normally included in a County
ordinance. County Counsel is recommending that such provisions
be inserted into the WCCTAC JEPA, either in the body of that
agreement or as an exhibit. The Draft Ordinance in Exhibit
"A" : revises the WCCTAC proposal to correct this concern.
3 . The WCCTAC version of the draft ordinance does not contain
express language that would prevent a party, including the
County, from reducing or rescinding the fees listed in the
ordinance. County Counsel suggests that if is a concern to the
County, appropriate language could be inserted into the WCCTAC
JEPA.
4 . County Counsel ' s review of the Master Cooperative Agreement
they noted that the reciprocal indemnification clause in the
agreement may not adequately protect the County in a situation
where a claim or loss is allegedly caused by the concurrent
negligence of the County and one or more parties to the
agreement. County Counsel's memo outlines several alternatives
to correct this potential problem.
Although the other WCCTAC member jurisdictions are not expected to
formally hold hearings on the proposed ordinance (WCCTAC version)
until the month of May, several key issues have begun to emerge
regarding the WCCTAC proposal.
• Concern that the proposed fees may be a discouragement for
economic development, particularly development of affordable
housing;
West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program
April 15, 1997
Page 5
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS (continued)
• Concern that the revenue potential from the proposed fees over
twenty years is too insubstantial to adequately raise funds
needed now for the State Route 4 West Freeway Gap Closure
Project;
• Concern that proposed ordinance language relating to credit
against fees and highway corridor preservation might be too
restrictive;
Staff recommends that as a next step the Board of Supervisors
continue the public hearing on this matter to Board Meeting on
Tuesday, May 20, 1997, to await the response from the other
jurisdictions to both the WCCTAC proposal package and to revisions
to the package as suggested by County Counsel.
Public Notice:
Government Code Section 66484 and Division 913 , Title 9 of the
Contra Costa Ordinance Code provide for assessing and collecting
fees for development and construction of bridges and/or major
thoroughfares within a designated area of benefit and as a
condition of issuing a building permit. The Community Development
and Public Works Departments have completed a Development Program
Report for the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation
Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit, 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 .
CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION
Failure to form the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation
Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit would result in lower revenue
funding for the State Route 4 West Freeway Gap Closure Project and
this could potentially delay the project. A program of regional
traffic fees or alternative mitigation is a requirement of Measure
C-1988. The CCTA has established June 30, 1997 as the deadline for
local jurisdictions to establish such programs through their
Regional Transportation Planning Committee. Failure of the County
to adopt a fee program in West County may cause the CCTA to
withhold future allocations of the County's Measure C-88 return-to-
source funds.
attachments (6 items)
JMW/PR/j:pioch\wcctac\bos.wc4
ATTACHMENTS
1. Exhibit "A" : Draft Ordinance
2 . Exhibit "B" : Development Program Report
3 . Exhibit "C" : Nexus Study
4 . Exhibit "D" : Draft amendments to WCCTAC JEPA
5. Exhibit "E" : Draft Master Cooperative Agreement between
CCTA and WCCTAC Jurisdictions
6. Exhibit "F" : Memorandum from County Counsel to Community
Development re: West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee Program, dated
3/24/97
• r
Exhibit A
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
(Adoption of West Contra Costa Subregional
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 West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee 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 County 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 West
Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee 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:
West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fees:
Land Use Tyne Fee Amount
Single family residential. $700 per dwelling unit
Individual units and duet homes
with one shared wall, and
residential condominiums.
Multiple family residential $560 per dwelling unit
Commercial, office, industrial, retail $0.20 per square foot of gross floor area
Other uses not identified above $150 per trip generated
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
• I
1 1.
The fees shall be payable at the time of issuance of a building permit, 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. Hercules-Rodeo-Crockett Area of Benefit
2. Richmond-El Sobrante Area of Benefit
3. North Richmond Area of Benefit
4. West County Area of Benefit
In addition, the following shall be exempt from the fees levied under this ordinance: (1) projects
for which a vesting tentative map have been approved as of the effective date of this ordinance;
and (2) projects covered by an existing development agreement which expressly excludes
collection of any additional fees.
The fee for uses not listed above shall be determined by the County through information generated
by appropriate traffic studies, conducted according to the methodology developed and approved
by the WCCTAC Technical Advisory Committee, with concurrence of the WCCTAC.
A project that replaces an existing structure or development is subject to the fee only to the extent
that it would generate more peak hour vehicle trips than the existing development.
SECTION V. FEE CREDITS. A developer may request a further reduction in fees
through the County if the project would generate a lower number of trips than data provided by
the Institute of Transportation-Engineers (ITE) and above and beyond the discounted fee rates
already built into the program. Such request shall be supported by appropriate traffic studies,
conducted according to the methodology developed and approved by the WCCTAC Technical
Advisory Committee, with concurrence of the WCCTAC.
A developer may receive credit against fees for the dedication of land for right-of-way
and/or construction of improvements for specific bridge and major thoroughfare improvements
described in the Development Program Report on file with the Clerk of the Board. The amount
of credit shall be determined by the County based on actual, documented expenses or an appraisal
prepared by a qualified appraiser acceptable to the County, and the credit shall be exclusive of the
dedications, setbacks, improvements, and/or other traffic mitigation measures which are a
condition of development approval.
-2-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
r ,
SECTION VI. FEE AREA. The fees set forth in this ordinance shall apply to all property
described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
SECTION VIL 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 West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee 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 West 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 VIII. 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 IX. 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.
SECTION X. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect 60 days after passage
but shall not become operative until the Community Development Department files a statement
with the Clerk of the Board certifying that similar fees have been adopted by the Cities of El
Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo. Within 15 days of passage, this ordinance
shall be published once, with the names of the Supervisors voting for and against it, in the -
, a newspaper 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.
-3-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
f
PASSED and ADOPTED on 1997 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors and County
Administrator
By:
Deputy Board Chair
-4-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
r ,
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF
WEST CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE AREA
-5-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
WCCTAC Boundary
Legal Description
EXHIBIT"A"
Real property in Contra Costa County, California described as follows:
Beginning at the most south easterly comer of the 18.04 acre parcel of land shown on the Record
of Survey filed December 22, 1931 in Book 2 of Licensed Surveyor Maps at page 5; thence from
said Point of Beginning south 66°11'00"west 125.15 feet to the northeasterly line of the Southern
Pacific Railroad right of way; thence southerly to the southwesterly line of said railroad right of way
to an 1/2" iron pipe and tags L.S. 3489 as shown on the Record of Survey filed April 10, 1990 in
Book 93 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 32; thence south 43026'43"west 341 feet more or
less to the westerly right of way line of Carquinez Scenic Drive (formerly Pomona Avenue); thence
along said right of way line in a general southerly direction 555 feet more or less to the easterly
boundary of the parcel of land granted to Hook Recorded December 19, 1993 in Book 18288 of
Official Records at page 889; thence along said boundary in a general southerly and southeasterly
direction 1771 feet more or less to the southeasterly comer of said Hook parcel (18288 OR 889);
thence along the south line of said parcel and its westerly prolongation,west 4050 feet more or less
to the easterly right of way line of McEwen Road; thence westerly 50 feet more or less to the
westerly right of way line;thence continuing westerly 4250 feet more or less to the northwest comer
of the parcel of land granted to Brenkle Enterprises recorded December 13, 1990 in Book 16298
of Official Records at page 223; said point is on the easterly right of way line of Cummings Skyway;
thence along said easterly right of way, southerly and southeasterly 3301 feet more or less to the
northerly right of way line of the.John Muir Parkway (Highway 4); thence in a general southerly
direction 1070 feet more or less to the northerly boundary of the parcel of land shown on the
Record of Survey lot line Adjustment 64-88 filed February 15, 1989 in Book 90 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 16; thence along said northerly line and its northwesterly prolongation
north 78031'05"west 800 feet more or less to the southeasterly right of way line of Franklin Canyon
Road; thence along said right of way line in a southwesterly direction 5200 feet to the westerly
comer of parcel"B" as shown on the Minor Subdivision MS 98-70 filed October 9, 1970 in Book 14
of Parcel Maps at page 24, said point is on the easterly right of way line of the Atchison Topeka
and Santa Fe Railroad right of way; thence southwesterly to the westerly right of way line of said
railroad;thence along said westerly right of way line in a general southerly direction 5400 feet more
or less; thence leaving said westerly right of way line south 450east 2300 feet; thence along the
westerly boundary of the 137.40 acre and 98.59 acre parcels south 0'20'20" east 2621.20 feet to
the southwest comer of the 98.59 acre parcel as shown on the Record of Survey filed May 29,
1953 in Book 15 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 44; thence along the southerly boundary
(15 LSM 44) line south 87°50'20" east 2680.05 feet to the southeasterly corner of said 98.59 acre
parcel (15 LSM 44); thence along the west boundary Part F Rancho EI Pinole south 0054" west
1837 feet as shown on the Record of Survey filed October 20, 1937 in Book 4 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 26; thence continuing southerly along said west boundary 1600 feet more
or less to point PR 26 on the boundary of that parcel of land granted to Soehngen recorded
February 22, 1980 in Book 9741 of Official Records at page 584; thence along said boundary
easterly 600 feet to the westerly right of way line of Ferndale Road; thence along said right of way
1
tine southeasterly 1150 feet more or less to the northeasterly boundary of Parcel "A" of minor
subdivision MS 81-78 filed July 11, 1979 in Book 78 of Parcel Maps at page 45; thence south
75°58'05"west 1071.26 feet; thence south 30019"west 282.28 feet; thence south 24°21'06" east
1165.5 feet to the southwesterly comer of Parcel B (78 PM 45); thence leaving Parcel B (78 PM
45) southwesterly 6687.79 feet along the general southeasterly boundary of Parcel B to its most
southerly comer as shown on minor subdivision MS 8-87 filed June 25, 1993 in Book 162 of Parcel
Maps at page 25; thence southwesterly 1719.2 feet more or less along the northwesterly boundary
of Parcel"A"to the most westerly comer of parcel A as shown on minor subdivision MS 18-91 filed
December 29, 1992 in Book 160 of Parcel Maps at page 33; thence along the boundary of minor
subdivision MS 244-77 filed September 11, 1979 in Book 80 of Parcel Maps at page 35 the
following courses (1) south 1 02629"west 1058.16 feet, (2) south 87'18'30"west 2133.27 feet(3)
north 89021'12"west 4888 feet more or less to the southwesterly comer of Parcel "A" (80 PM 35);
thence southerly, southwesterly, southeasterly 10454 feet more or less along the boundary of Tract
No. 27 as shown on the map of the Rancho El Sobrante to the most easterly point of Tract No, 26
(Rancho EI Sobrante); thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Tract No. 26 and
its southwesterly prolongation to the northeasterly right of way line of San Pablo Dam Road;thence
southeasterly along said right of way tine to the southeasterly boundary of Specific Trac D (Rancho
Ei Sobrante); thence south 47°50' west to the southerly comer of said Speck Tract D; thence
along the southwest boundary line of Specific Tract D north 42039' west 2253.9 feet and north
30°00'west 1511.4 feet more or less to the northerly comer of Lot 62 (Rancho EI Sobrante); thence
south 44°58'west along the northwesterly line of said Lot 62 to the Alameda/Contra Costa County
boundary line; thence along the Contra Costa County boundary line in a general westerly,
northwesterly, northerly, northeasterly and easterly direction to a point on the County boundary line
which is perpendicular to the Point of Beginning; thence along said perpendicular line to the Point
of Beginning.
RZ:jIg
g:lclericallexhibitstltSLoUin.t3
April 1, 1997
2
1
Exhibit B
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
FOR THE
WEST CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE
Prepared By and For The:
Contra Costa County Community Development Department
and
Contra Costa County Public Works Department
sr+'cd6i+`�
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
April 1, 1997
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1
BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
PURPOSE OF AND NEED OF PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
PROJECT SCHEDULING AND STAGING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
FEE AREA BOUNDARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PURPOSE OF THE FEE PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
USE OF THE FEES .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. . . . . . 11
GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
CALCULATION OF FEE SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
TRANSFER OF FEE PROGRAM REVENUE TO LEAD AGENCY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
COLLECTION OF FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
INTEREST ON FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
IN LIEU DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
1
LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
FIGURE 1 GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT 2
FIGURE 2 SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE 1 7
FIGURE 3 SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE 11 8
FIGURE 4 MAP OF PROPOSED FEE PROGRAM AREA BOUNDARY 10
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 ABAG FORECAST OF WEST COUNTY 12
PROJECTED POPULATION (1997-2010)
TABLE 2 ABAG FORECAST OF WEST COUNTY 12
PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT (1997-2010)
TABLE 3 A.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (1997-2010) 13
TABLE 4 PROPOSED FEE PROGRAM RATES 14
TABLE 5 FEE PROGRAM COMMITMENT TOWARD PROJECT 15
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF FEE AREA 17
-ii-
l
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
FOR THE WEST CONTRA COSTA
SUB-REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE
INTRODUCTION
This Development Program Report outlines the concept, methodology, and procedure for
implementing the West Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee. The
purpose of this report is to outline a program to augment funding for the design and
construction of safety and route continuity improvements to the western segment of
highway on State Route 4 West between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 80.
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 1991, the need to establish funding programs
to ensure that new growth pay for expanding or upgrading public infrastructure was
included in the Contra Costa County General Plan. Adoption of this fee will assist the
County in complying with both of these requirements.
The remainder of this report explains the means of providing funds for the design and
construction of road safety and continuity improvements to State Route 4 West, which will
serve planned growth within the general West County area.
This Development Program Report is required by the County Board of Supervisors' Policy
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.
1
BACKGROUND
State Route 4 begins at the interchange with Interstate 80 (1-80) near the northwestely
limits of Contra Costa County and proceeds along an east-west route for 31 miles to
connect with State Route 160 in Antioch. State Route 4 is one of two east-west corridors
in Contra Costa County which links major employment centers, vital industries,
educational, governmental, and recreational facilities, and residential developments in
eastern, central, and western subareas of the County. It serves as a key route for
intercounty and interregional truck freight movement. Within this 31-mile stretch, State
Route 4 is predominantly a divided freeway with a minimum of two lanes in each direction,
except for the 4.7 mile section between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway, which is a two-lane
undivided highway extending through the Franklin Canyon area to the City of Hercules.
This section of State Route 4 West is an at-grade, undivided two-lane highway with
restricted sight distances and nonstandard shoulder widths and curves radii. It is located
adjacent to the two-lane highway is land set aside for grazing agricultural, industrial,
recreational, and residential uses which currently have limited access to the highway.
An improvements to this 4.7 mile section of State Route 4, which included construction of
a freeway, was studied as early as 1958. In April 1985, the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) prepared a Route Concept Report for State Route 4 that
recommended the 4.7 mile two-lane, undivided section of the highway between 1-80 and
Cummings Skyway be upgraded to a six-lane divided freeway with extra hill climbing lanes
to accommodate increased volume of trailer-truck traffic and peak hour commuter traffic.
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority has most recently completed a Major
Investment Study (MIS) for this section of State Route 4 West which evaluated the
technical and cost effectiveness of various transportation strategies for this corridor. The
MIS concluded that this section of the highway should be upgraded to a four-lane divided
highway and ultimately as travel demand warrants and funding becomes available it should
be further improved to a full freeway configuration. t
In 1988, the voters of Contra Costa conveyed their support for the State Route 4 West Gap
Closure Project by approving a '/z cent sales tax (Measure C), a portion of which was
designated to help fund a freeway gap closure project. The project, as outlined in the
ballot measure, included widening and improving the 4.7 mile section of State Route 4 to
a full freeway. FIGURE 1 shows the general location of the project.
Wor Investment Study:Route 4 Gap from I-80 to Cummin"Skyway in Contra Costa County,
prepared by Mark Thomas&Co.for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority(March 10, 1995)
2
FIGURE 1
GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT
Route 4 Gap
From 1-80 to Cummings Skyway
in Contra Costa County
t
VA EJO t
AI
MARTINEZ
4
HERCULES
CONCORD
RICHMOND
WALNUT CREEK
4
x�
BERKELEY
4 OA ND
SAN FRA N
r
6Ii .i
i
Contra Costa
Transportation Authority
3
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT
The purpose of the proposed project is to enhance safety, to alleviate existing and
projected peak hour traffic congestion, and to improve operations on the 4.7 mile (7.6
kilometers) segment of State Route 4 between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway. This project
is most often referred to as the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project.
SAFETY:
The western section of State Route 4 has a high volume of trailer truck traffic
(approximately 11 percent of total traffic volume) and has many access points to local
businesses and residences. Safety improvements are needed in the 4.7 mile segment
between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway to address the following conditions:
1) Substandard shoulder widths and curve radii and restricted sight distances;
2) Vehicles turning left into and out of businesses and residences which now must
cross onto the highway lanes against high speed traffic;
3) Substandard acceleration and deceleration lanes where access to the highway has
been provided;
4) Substandard trucking climbing lane in the eastbound direction.
Between 1989 and 1994, Caltrans reported 213 accidents, resulting in twelve fatalities and
181 injuries, occurring within the 4.7 mile segment of State Route 4 West. The fatality rate
for this period is 0.042 accidents per Million-Vehicle Miles, which is slightly higher than the
state wide average for similar facilities.Z
TRAFFIC CONGESTION:
The traffic volumes on State Route 4 West routinely cause significant delays for mainline
traffic as well as vehicles accessing the highway from roads or driveways. Annual Average
Daily Traffic(AADT) capacity for a two-lane highway in level terrain with 11% truck traffic
is approximately 22,100 according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (/TE)
Highway Capacity Manual. Within the project limits the 1990 AADT was determined to be
32,000 between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway. According to 1990 data this section of the
highway was operating at below Level of Service E. More recent data indicate that today
in 1997 the highway is nearing its capacity level.
It is noted that the ideal total two-way capacity for a two lane undivided highway is 2,800
2 Maior Investment StudY�Route 4 Gap from I-80 to Cummings Skyway in Contra Costa County,
prepared by Mark Thomas&Co.for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority(March 10, 1995)
4
• I
f 1.
vehicles per hour. However, given the percentage of trucks, directional split, narrow
shoulders, reduced curve radii, and restricted sight distance, the theoretical two-way
capacity on the 4.7 mile segment of State Route 4 West is closer to 2,300 vehicles per
hour. Recent traffic counts recorded a total AM peak hour volume at 2,750 and speeds
at approximately 44 mph near the Franklin Canyon Golf Course. Traffic projections for
Year 2000 indicate an expected increase in traffic demand of up to 25%. Recent travel
demand modeling predicts that AADT in the Year 2000 for this segment of highway will
reach 39,000 (roughly 75% higher than theoretical capacity) and total two way peak hour
volume will increase to 3,560 vehicles per hour(55% higher than theoretical capacity). As
traffic demand increases, LOS will further degrade on the route significantly increasing
motorist delay, if additional highway lane capacity in both directions is not provided.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project would construct a full four-lane freeway
facility between 1-80 and the Cummings Skyway Interchange and is currently estimated to
cost $112 million. The freeway project would be constructed on one of four alignment
options, now being studied in an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report (EIS/EIR), that generally run 100 to 400 feet north of the existing highway. The
project is planned to be constructed in two main phases:
Phase 1 - Constructing a Fully Divided Four-Lane Highway. This initial phase would
construct two new lanes north of the existing roadway (along the ultimate freeway
alignment). In conjunction with the existing two lane roadway, Phase 1 would provide a
four-lane fully divided facility through the corridor and would include only one full
movement at-grade intersection which may or many not warrant a signal. From 1-80 to
Sycamore Avenue an additional lane would be constructed in each direction resulting in
a four-lane facility. Between Sycamore Avenue and Loprest/Asbury driveway, two
additional lanes would be constructed immediately north of the existing roadway. An
overcrossing would be constructed near the Unocal Carbon plant to eliminate need for an
at-grade intersection in this area. The new roadway lanes would then transition northerly
between the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) tracks and the Yellow Freight
Systems and Burton Machine sites, climbing to cross over BNSF rail tracks north of
Christie Underpass and would then conform back to the existing highway alignment just
west of Cummings Skyway. Eastbound lanes would utilize the existing highway and
westbound traffic would use the two newly constructed lanes. See FIGURE 2 for a
schematic diagram of these improvements. The total cost for Phase 1 improvements is
estimated at $65 million.
Phase 11 - Completing the Freeway. The second phase would construct two additional
lanes along the same alignment immediately north of the lanes constructed in Phase I,
resulting in a four-lane freeway facility between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway Interchange.
5
• r
f
Once this phase is completed, the existing roadway would then be converted to a
continuous two way south side frontage road, providing local access from Hercules to
Cummings Skyway Interchange. Phase /I is estimated to cost $47 million. See FIGURE
3 for a schematic diagram of Phase /I improvements.
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND STAGING
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority is currently preparing an EIS/EIR for the
project. It is anticipated that the draft EIS/EIR will be released for public review and
comment during Spring 1997 and certified by Fall 1997. Contingent upon securing funds,
the project's design activities could begin as early as Summer 1997 and be ready for
construction by mid-1999. Due to the uncertainty in the level and timing of funding for this
project, Phase I construction could be divided into several stages.
6
1
FIGURE 2
SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE!
ROUTE 4 FREEWAY GAP PROJECT
PHASE 1
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
"&E Transmission
Tower Ilns
V.1 pow"
«mwemhl r 2ED)
wy^a`
I..w.v..w,00r
n.11'.ry
in Gn,Yb LJ
17
G17Y NALLI _.
�ynn�an CIIv..arl.ell.n' � ate•
Fli,rov.,..rll
ot•yr.U.MM..ctlon .S} Re_ inYY.C..r« }t
FOYnWi...M.l,rk FoM4w siow armw
CONTRA COSTA
TRANSPORTA77ONAUTHOAYTY s,.meo,a e.mc
' w.WlnYti�FY
MARK THOMAS i CO.INC.
CCONSMIM CM e/w®N A W..ffi s .ws
rars Attachment A
3.10.97
7
� r
FIGURE 3
SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE H
ROUTE 4 FREEWAY GAP PROJECT
PHASE 2
SPG&E Transmission
Tower line
i
t AUM x Ws r
t Frwwy CarplMbn
® f
Aw'Y Oo•F
G': � 0YN i1R :MrY
CYiI'HALL* �
OY�Av �eeM� X41 fS�
mnevW Wllr*w yProj r Cb
Eritlrq 11aYb I uWftFO
n Me ray henbP rw0
Frady.iw0
' Fn.W.G.Y.. pw unE.rM
1 CNYCxne � _
m
CONTRA COSTA
TRANSPORTATIONAUTHORITY
MARK THOMAS i CO. INC.
COM 7000 CM 0/0/6RJ 0 M�M.NOM1x
Attachment B
3.10.97
8
• r
r.
FEE PROGRAM AREA BOUNDARY
The fee area will include the unincorporated areas of western Contra Costa County,
including those areas adjacent to the communities of Crockett, Rodeo, North Richmond,
East Richmond Heights, and EI Sobrante.
It is anticipated that the cities of Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, and EI Cerrito
will form similar fee areas within their incorporated areas.
FIGURE 4 shows the general location of the Fee Area in western Contra Costa County.
A legal description of the fee area is attached as EXHIBIT "A.'
PURPOSE OF THE FEE PROGRAM
The purpose of this program is to generate funds, through the adoption of a dedicated fee
on development for subregional traffic mitigation, that will support and augment funding
for the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. The State Route 4 West Gap Closure
Project will improve safety and route continuity to a substandard highway, provide
additional capacity, and help to reduce congestion on this and other nearby roads. By
adoption of this fee, the transportation system can keep pace with the planned growth in
the area by meeting the region's transportation needs and improving transportation
infrastructure contained in the circulation elements for the General Plans of Hercules and
Contra Costa County and also in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's Countywide
Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The funds collected may also be used as the local
match required to obtain State and/or Federal funds for the State Route 4 West Gap
Closure Project.
USE OF THE FEES
The proposed fees will be used to augment other funding sources, including Measure C
Sales Tax funds and State and Federal transportation funds, for the State Route 4 West
Gap Closure Project. The fees collected will be used for project development activities,
including planning and design studies, preparation of environmental reports, acquisition
of right of way, and construction of the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. The fees
may be used to reimburse agencies who advance funds for the project from other funding
sources. These fees will also pay for some administrative expenses incurred in developing
and administering the fee program.
9
� r
FIGURE 4
MAP OF BOUNDARY
PROPOSED
WEST CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM
pi
,
No
Suisun Bayd Mars ��;�.
�
Sen Pablo Bey
\ 1.�� Ltaz.• j f,'
N C'
o WCC
Fee Area
Marin' Contra Costa County
}ter 0akland P�'MEVA GOU
si
San
i FranclscOy>
10
The proposed fees will support improvements to the State Route 4 West Gap Closure
Project to meet the minimum traffic level of service requirements and safety demands
for the 4.7 mile section of highway. The project will be constructed to Caltrans highway
design standards.
Improvements to this section of State Route 4 West will be constructed in usable
segments as funds become available.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project is necessary for safety and to improve the
capacity of the road network serving the West County area as determined by planned
growth depicted in the General Plans for Contra Costa County, Hercules, Pinole, San
Pablo, Richmond and EI Cerrito. The road network outlined in these documents depicts
State Route 4 West as a major transportation corridor.
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 (ITEI. Tri2 Generation Manual. 5th Edition and
results of the West County Traffic Model. As a result, the proposed fees are directly
related to traffic generated by each particular land use category with non-residential trip
generation factors significantly reduced from the standard values in the ITE manual.
GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP
The Circulation Element for the Contra Costa County General Plan depicts State Route
4 West as a four-lane divided highway. The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project
will, therefore, meet an objective of the Contra Costa County General Plan's Circulation
Element by constructing a divided four lane facility on the 4.7 mile segment of State
Route 4 West between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway.
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
The development potential for the West County fee program area was estimated using
the Association of Bay Area Governments' Projections 94 forecast which projected
growth to the year 2010 for the cities of Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, and EI
Cerrito and Contra Costa County. The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project will be
partially funded by development mitigation fees uniformly assessed over the entire
West County region per dwelling unit or per square foot of gross floor area. For
11
example, the fee assessed to a new single family home would be the same whether it
was located in Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, EI Cerrito or in an
unincorporated community in the West County area. A summary of the estimated
development potential for the fee area is shown in TABLE 1: ABAG Forecast of West
County Projected Population and TABLE 2: ABAG Forecast of West County
Employment (1997-2010).
TABLE 1
ABAG Forecast of West County Projected Population (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
EI Cerrito 30,004 31,500 1,496 5.9% 5.0%
Hercules 19,390 29,500 7,410 29.0% 38.2%
Pinole 27,742 29,500 1,758 6.9% 6.3%
Richmond 109,298 122,200 12,902 50.5% 11.8%
San Pablo 29,734 30,800 1,066 4.2% 3.6%
Rodeo-Crockett 12,148 13,100 952 3.7% 7.8%
EI Sobrante*
TOTAL West County 228,903 254,473 1 25,570 1 100.0%
Growth in EI Sobrante is included in the Richmond area
TABLE 2
ABAG Forecast of West County Projected Employment (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction Retail Office Industrial Total Share Growth
EI Cerrito 28 326 -32 322 1.6% 4.4%
Hercules 642 968 1,076 2,686 13.5% 78.7%
Pinole 342 326 172 840 4.2% 15.0%
Richmond 1,318 7,288 6,564 15,170 1 76.3% 38.9%
San Pablo 34 496 82 612 3.1% 8.7%
Rodeo-Crockett 70 142 28 240 1.2% 10.5%
EI Sobrante*
TOTAL West County 2,434 9,546 7,899_L__19,870 100.0% 1 30.700L
* Growth in El Sobrante is included in the Richmond area
12
BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT
The portion of the cost of the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project to be funded by
this fee program has been distributed between the individual land use categories based
on daily a.m. peak hour trip generation. TABLE 3 presents the total growth in a.m.
peak hour traffic by jurisdiction, assuming that Phase 1, State Route 4 West Gap
Closure Project is completed by Year 2010.
TABLE 3
A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
EI Cerrito 10,481 11,268 787 6.1% 7.5%
Hercules 9,536 13,315 3,779 29.2% 39.6%
Pinole 8,976 10,229 1,253 9.7% 14.0%
Richmond 29,620 34,726 5,106 39.4% 17.2%
San Pablo 10,605 12,291 1,686 13.0% 15.9%
Rodeo-Crockett 3,587 3,940 354 2.7% 9.9%
EI Sobrante 221 214
TOTAL West Coun 73 026 85,983 12,957 1000:/:.:L:::17.7%
" Growth in El Sobrante is included in the Richmond area
13
CALCULATION OF FEE SCHEDULE
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 4.
TABLE 4
PROPOSED FEE PROGRAM RATES
LAND USE CATEGORY FEE RATE
Single Family Residential $700/dwelling unit
Multi-Family Residential $560/dwelling unit
Retail Commercial $0.20/square foot
Office $0.20/square foot
Industrial $0.20/square foot
Other $150.00/peak hourtdp
A development mitigation fee appears to be a viable revenue source at this time to
augment funding for the Stale Route 4 West Gap Closure Project because of the
significant demand on transportation funds to improve road and transportation
infrastructure throughout the Bay Area and the entire State. The above estimates
include construction, right of way, environmental documentation, planning, engineering,
administration, and contingencies.
The cost of the project would be uniformly distributed per each dwelling unit or each
square foot of gross floor area of building space throughout the entire West County
area.
FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PROJECT
This fee program will provide a funding commitment toward Phase I of State Route 4
West Gap Closure Project. Based on ABAG growth projections to the year 2010, the
cumulative fee revenues received from each participating jurisdiction in West County
will contribute funding for about 6% of the $65 million needed for the State Route 4
West Gap Closure Project, Phase 1, or, approximately $ 4.1 million (See TABLE 5).
14
� r
1
TABLES
FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PROJECT
PROJECT FEE PROGRAM MEASURE OTHER TOTAL
DESCRIPTION CONTRIBUTION C FUNDING COST
SALES SOURCES ESTIMATE
TAX
Phase 1, SR-4 West Fwy $ 4.1 Mil. $ 40.1 Mil. to be $ 65 Mil.
Gap Closure Project determined
Phase ll, SR-4 West n/a n/a n/a $ 47 Mil.
Fwy. Gap Closure
Project
$112
Million
TRANSFER OF FEE PROGRAM REVENUE TO LEAD AGENCY
Contra Costa County, and the cities of Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond and EI
Cerrito, will jointly enter into a Master Cooperative Agreement with the Contra Costa
Transportation Authority to serve as the serve as the lead or sponsoring agency for
financial administration, environmental clearance, planning, design, and construction of
the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. This Master Cooperative Agreement will
establish procedures for transferring fee program revenue from each participating
jurisdiction to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.
It is anticipated that fee revenues will be transferred by Contra Costa County to the
Contra Costa Transportation Authority on a quarterly basis, with a brief Ouarterly
Report which includes a description of fee revenue collected and any credits against
the fee granted by Contra Costa County and less any administrative expenses incurred
by Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority will deposit the fee
revenue into an interest-bearing account to be used solely for activities in support of the
State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project.
15
ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES
Project cost estimates will be reviewed annually by analyzing the previous year's
change in the California Construction Cost index 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 upon issuance of building permits, in accordance with Section
913-4.204 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. 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 the planning, environmental documentation, design, acquisition of
right of way, and construction of the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project and for
the purpose of fee program administration.
IN LIEU DEDICATION
A development may be required to construct, or dedicate right of way for, a portion of
the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. In such a case the developer may be
eligible to receive credit against the fee.
PR
amp61\wdee.rpt
16
� I 1
JI
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF FEE PROGRAM AREA
17
f „
WCCTAC Boundary
Legal Description
EXHIBIT "A"
Real property in Contra Costa County, California described as follows:
Beginning at the most south easterly comer of the 18.04 acre parcel of land shown on the Record
of Survey filed December 22, 1931 in Book 2 of Licensed Surveyor Maps at page 5; thence from
said Point of Beginning south 66011'00"west 125.15 feet to the northeasterly line of the Southern
Pack Railroad right of way; thence southerly to the southwesterly line of said railroad right of way
to an 1/2" iron pipe and tags L.S. 3489 as shown on the Record of Survey filed April 10, 1990 in
Book 93 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 32; thence south 4302643"west 341 feet more or
less to the westerly right of way line of Carquinez Scenic Drive (formerly Pomona Avenue); thence
along said right of way line in a general southerly direction 555 feet more or less to the easterly
boundary of the parcel of land granted to Hook Recorded December 19, 1993 in Book 18288 of
Official Records at page 889; thence along said boundary in a general southerly and southeasterly
direction 1771 feet more or less to the southeasterly corner of said Hook parcel (18288 OR 889);
thence along the south line of said parcel and its westerly prolongation, west 4050 feet more or less
to the easterly right of way line of McEwen Road; thence westerly 50 feet more or less to the
westerly right of way line;thence continuing westerly 4250 feet more or less to the northwest comer
of the parcel of land granted to Brenkle Enterprises recorded December 13, 1990 in Book 16298
of Official Records at page 223; said point is on the easterly right of way line of Cummings Skyway;
thence along said easterly right of way, southerly and southeasterly 3301 feet more or less to the
northerly right of way line of the-John Muir Parkway (Highway 4); thence in a general southerly
direction 1070 feet more or less to the northerly boundary of the parcel of land shown on the
Record of Survey lot line Adjustment 64-88 filed February 15, 1989 in Book 90 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 16; thence along said northerly line and its northwesterly prolongation
north 78031'05"west 800 feet more or less to the southeasterly right of way line of Franklin Canyon
Road; thence along said right of way line in a southwesterly direction 5200 feet to the westerly
comer of parcel "B"as shown on the Minor Subdivision MS 98-70 filed October 9, 1970 in Book 14
of Parcel Maps at page 24, said point is on the easterly right of way line of the Atchison Topeka
and Santa Fe Railroad right of way; thence southwesterly to the westerly right of way line of said
railroad;thence along said westerly right of way line in a general southerly direction 5400 feet more
or less; thence leaving said westerly right of way line south 45°east 2300 feet; thence along the
westerly boundary of the 137.40 acre and 98.59 acre parcels south 0020'20" east 2621.20 feet to
the southwest corner of the 98.59 acre parcel as shown on the Record of Survey filed May 29,
1953 in Book 15 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 44; thence along the southerly boundary
(15 LSM 44) line south 87050'20" east 2680.05 feet to the southeasterly corner of said 98.59 acre
parcel (15 LSM 44); thence along the west boundary Part F Rancho EI Pinole south 0°54" west
1837 feet as shown on the Record of Survey filed October 20, 1937 in Book 4 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 26; thence continuing southerly along said west boundary 1600 feet more
or less to point PR 26 on the boundary of that parcel of land granted to Soehngen recorded
February 22, 1980 in Book 9741 of Official Records at page 584; thence along said boundary
easterly 600 feet to the westerly right of way line of Ferndale Road; thence along said right of way
1
.r
line southeasterly 1150 feet more or less to the northeasterly boundary of Parcel `A" of minor
subdivision MS 81-78 filed July 11, 1979 in Book 78 of Parcel Maps at page 45; thence south
75058'05"west 1071.26 feet; thence south 30°19"west 282.28 feet; thence south 24021'06" east
1165.5 feet to the southwesterly comer of Parcel B (78 PM 45); thence leaving Parcel B (78 PM
45) southwesterly 6687.79 feet along the general southeasterly boundary of Parcel B to its most
southerly comer as shown on minor subdivision MS 8-87 filed June 25, 1993 in Book 162 of Parcel
Maps at page 25; thence southwesterly 1719.2 feet more or less along the northwesterly boundary
of Parcel "A"to the most westerly corner of parcel A as shown on minor subdivision MS 18-91 filed
December 29, 1992 in Book 160 of Parcel Maps at page 33; thence along the boundary of minor
subdivision MS 244-77 filed September 11, 1979 in Book 80 of Parcel Maps at page 35 the
following courses (1) south 1026'29"west 1058.16 feet, (2) south 87018'30"west 2133.27 feet (3)
north 89021'12"west 4888 feet more or less to the southwesterly comer of Parcel "A" (80 PM 35);
thence southerly, southwesterly, southeasterly 10454 feet more or less along the boundary of Tract
No. 27 as shown on the map of the Rancho El Sobrante to the most easterly point of Tract No. 26
(Rancho EI Sobrante);thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Tract No. 26 and
its southwesterly prolongation to the northeasterly right of way line of San Pablo Dam Road;thence
southeasterly along said right of way line to the southeasterly boundary of Specific Tract D (Rancho
EI Sobrante); thence south 47°50' west to the southerly comer of said Specific Tract D; thence
along the southwest boundary line of Specific Tract D north 42039' west 2253.9 feet and north
30°00'west 1511.4 feet more or less to the northerly comer of Lot 62 (Rancho EI Sobrante); thence
south 44°58'west along the northwesterly line of said Lot 62 to the Alameda/Contra Costa County
boundary line; thence along the Contra Costa County boundary line in a general westerly,
northwesterly, northerly, northeasterly and easterly direction to a point on the County boundary line
which is perpendicular to the Point of Beginning; thence along said perpendicular line to the Point
of Beginning.
RZ:jlg
g:lctericallexhibits\RSLotlin.t3
April 1, 1997
2
Exhibit C
1
West Contra Costa County Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Program
Nexus Analysis
■ Introduction
The West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) is in the process
of establishing a Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) in response to
Contra Costa County's Measure C— the 1/2 cent sales tax measure for transportation
programs and projects passed in 1988. Measure C requires that a program of regional
traffic mitigation fees, assessments, or other mitigations be developed to fund regional
and Subregional transportation projects. The STMP fee will be charged on new
development to augment other funding for the Highway 4 West project and two transit
projects. The purpose of this report is to document the technical analysis necessary for the
implementation of the STMP fee.
■ Methodology
An area-wide fee program must conform to the requirements of Government Code 66000
et seq. and subsequent opinions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court, California Supreme
Court, and lower courts. While the statutes and court decisions provide general
guidelines, the design and implementation of multi-jurisdictional impact fees is not as
tightly circumscribed as other local revenue measures (e.g., assessment districts, local
sales tax measures, subdivision map/developer exactions). Nevertheless, the statutory
requirements and judicial guidance allowed WCCTAC to follow a basic five step process
to design its regional fee:
1. Project the Amount of New Development. ABAG's Projections 94 provides the
forecast of new residents and employees moving into West County over the next 20
years. The nexus analysis and fee calculations depend on converting this projection of
residential and employment growth in each jurisdiction to a 13 year increment of new
trip generation (1997 to 2010). The net increment of new trips, however, must be
reduced by the trips from exempt development. Exempt development has already
received a vesting tentative map or has a development agreement excluding
assessment of additional fees.
2. Specify the Transportation Improvements Needed to Accommodate Growth. The
law allows WCCTAC to require new development to mitigate its full impact on the
West County routes of regional significance [i.e., maintain current levels of service
(LOS)]. The WCCTAC,however,has limited the maximum costs to new development
to approximately $24.5 million, the unfunded portion of eight projects. This is
substantially below the threshold of new development's full responsibility.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 1
1 „
3. Evaluate the Relationship Between the Improvements, the Share of Funding from
New Development, and the Impact of New Trip Generation. The improvements
must provide benefits that are in reasonable proportion to the amount of the impact
fees paid by new development. WCCTAC has chosen to impose a uniform fee
because it has reached a consensus that new development in all parts of the West
County area will receive roughly proportional benefits from the improvements.
4. Allocate Costs Across Land Use Types. Fee amounts should be fairly distributed
among residential, retail, office, and industrial development. This distribution is
based on the trip generation characteristics of each land use type.
5. Prepare Fee Schedules and Implementation Ordinances. Each local jurisdiction,
through their exercise of their police power, must adopt an ordinance imposing the
fee on development within their jurisdiction.
The remainder of this report explains the calculations and presents the results of each of
the five steps described above. Supporting documentation regarding transportation
analyses and computer modeling is available from WCCTAC.
■ New Development and Incremental Trip Generation
From 1997 through 2010, new development in the West Contra Costa County area will
generate 12,957 additional a.m. peak hour trips on the area's routes of regional
significance,an increase of almost 18 percent over the next 13 years.
Population, Employment, and Land Use Growth
The STMP assumes the population and employment growth forecast presented in the
ABAG 1994 Projections 94 for West Contra Costa County. The figures for 1997, the initial
year for STMP implementation, are estimated by straight line interpolation between the
years 1990 and 2000. Table 1 presents the population and employment projections.
Table 1. ABAG Forecast of West Contra Costa County Population (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
El Cerrito 30,004 31,500 1,496 5.9% 5.0%
Hercules 19,390 26,800 7,410 29.0% 38.2%
Pinole 27,742 29,500 1,758 6.9% 6.3%
Richmond 109,298 122,200 12,902 50.5% 11.8%
San Pablo 29,734 30,800 1,066 4.2% 3.6%
Rodeo-Crockett 12,148 13,100 952 3.7% 7.8%
EI Sobrante 587 573 (14) -0.1% -2.4%
Total WCCC 228,903 254,473 25,570 100.0% 11.2%
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 2
� I
t 1.
1
As shown in Table 1, residential development in Richmond will accommodate over half
of the area's population growth. Hercules, the area's fastest growing jurisdiction, will
account for 29 percent of the area's new residents. The remaining jurisdictions will
account for between four and seven percent.
Table 2 shows that office employment in Richmond is projected to grow the most of the
three categories of employment across all seven jurisdictions. Total employment for the
region is expected to increase by over 30 percent, with the total jobs in the City of
Hercules increasing by almost 79 percent.
Table 2. ABAG Forecast of West Contra Costa County Employment(1997 to 2010)
Retail Office Industrial Total Share Growth
El Cerrito 28 326 (32) 322 1.6% 4.4%
Hercules 642 968 1,076 2,686 13.5% 78.7%
Pinole 342 326 172 840 4.2% 15.0%
Richmond 1,318 7,288 6,564 15,170 76.3% 38.9%
San Pablo 34 496 82 612 3.1% 8.7%
Rodeo-Crockett 70 142 28 240 1.2% 10.5%
El Sobrante 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0%
Total WCCC 2,434 9,546 7,890 19,870 100.0% 30.70%
Population and employment growth will generate and attract new trips on the area's
regional roadways. The socioeconomic projections shown in Tables 1 and 2 are used in a
transportation demand forecasting model developed specifically for the WCCC area to
forecast the increase in travel. The results of the modeling are shown in Table 3.
Trip Generation
Table 3 presents the a.m. peak hour traffic volumes for the year 2010, assuming the
interim project on Highway 4 is constructed by the year 2010. It shows that new
development will increase a.m. peak hour trip volumes over 17 percent during the next 13
years. Almost 40 percent of this increase will come from the City and sphere of Richmond
and another 30 percent will come from Hercules.
Table 3. AM Peak Hour Volumes From 1997 to 2010
jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
EI Cerrito 10,481 11,268 787 6.1% 7.5%
Hercules 9,536 13,315 3,779 29.2% 39.6%
Pinole 8,976 10,229 1,253 9.7% 14.0%
Richmond 29,620 34,726 5,106 39.4% 17.2%
San Pablo 10,605 12,291 1,686 13.0% 15.9%
Rodeo-Crockett 3,587 3,940 354 2.7% 9.9%
El Sobrante 221 214 -7 -0.1% -3.3%
Total WCCC 73,026 85,983 12,957 100.0% 17.7%
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 3
I „
1
1
The total increment of 12,957 new trips encompasses all trips that either originate or
terminate in the West County area. In addition, roughly 3,000 new through trips
(external— external) will use some part of the West County regional system. The impact
of these new trips will be mitigated from state and federally-funded projects.
Exempt Development
The total increment of new trip generation (from 1997 to 2010) includes trips from new
development that will be exempt from paying a STMP fee. Their exemption is due to
either one of two legal criteria applying to a development project that has (1) been issued
a vested tentative map or (2) completed a development agreement that explicitly excludes
assessment of any additional fees. If either of these criteria apply to the development
project as of the official date the jurisdiction's council or board adopts the STMP, the
developer may pull the proscribed number of building permits without paying a fee.
While the transportation impacts of exempt development will be as real as non-exempt,
WCCTAC cannot impose a STMP fee and therefore cannot collect fee revenues for the
proposed projects. Thus, we must subtract the number of new trips generated by exempt
development from the toll increment of new trips. The results is the new amount of new
trips over which we can allocate the unfunded costs of the selected improvements.
We calculate the number of trips generated by exempt development by specifying the
exempt development project's specific type(s) of land use and converting these into trips.
A vested project with twenty dwelling units of single family residential, for example,
would generate 0.74 a.m. peak hour trips per unit or a total of 14.8 peak hour trips.
Table 4. Estimates of Exempt Development By jurisdiction (1997-2010)
Residential Non-Residential
Dwelling Unit Retail Sq.Ft. Office S+Ft. Total
El Cerrito 60,000 60,000
Hercules 42,000 42,000
Pinole —
Richmond 928,000 928,000
San Pablo 45
Rodeo-Crockett 100
El Sobrante 104
Total WCCC 249 60,000 970,000 1,030,000
As shown in Table 4, exempt development in the WCCC area amounts to 249 single
family dwelling units and slightly more than one million square feet of retail and office
space. None of the jurisdictions identified exempt industrial development.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 4
The appropriate PTE trip generation rates are applied to the exempt development in order
to estimate the number of new trips that must be deducted from the total increment.' The
total number of trips from exempt residential development equals 148 a.m. peak trips.
Non-residential development will generate 1,220 a.m. peak trips, producing 1,368 total
trips that must be deducted from the total increment of 12,957 new trips. The net number
of new trips that may be assigned a share of the cost of improvements equals 11,589.
■ Transportation Improvements
The WCCTAC has evaluated the impact of new development on its subregional system
and identified numerous improvements. These improvements—if all were completed by
the year 2010—would minirnize the worst of the congestion caused by the next 13 years of
growth within the area. While the WCCTAC could require new development to mitigate
all of the congestion it causes, cost of these improvements exceeds the amount of funding
private development could support.
WCCTAC, therefore, has selected the highest priority projects for inclusion in the STMP.
The cost of these improvements, shown in Table 5, includes over 54 percent of the total
funding from other public sources.
Table 5. STMP Projects and Available Funding
Available Unfunded
Project Total Cost Funding Amount
Route 4 Gap Project Near Hercules-Upgrade Conventional $48,000,000 $29,000,000 $19,000,000
Hwy.
El Cerrito BART Station Parking Structure $6,000,000 $4,543,000 $1,457,000
Richmond Intermodal BART Station Improvements $7,000,000 $5,500,000 $1,500,000
San Pablo Avenue Corridor or AC Transit $2,000,000 $2,000,000
WCCC Pathfinder Sign Program $214,500 $214,500
EBRP District 1 Bay Trail Crockett Section $123,000 $48,000 $75,000
EBRP District 2 Bay Trail Pinole Section $850,000 $750,000 $100,000
Pinole/Hercules Bay Trail Connector $80,000 $80,000
Total STMP $64,267,500 $39,841,000 $24,426,500
'The ITE trip generation rates are shown in Table 7.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 5
The unfunded portion of the STMP's total $64.3 million cost equals roughly $24.5 (1997
dollars), or about 38 percent. In addition to the eight STMP projects shown above, West
County will receive an additional $94 million worth of improvements on regional routes.'
This brings the total cost of regional improvements to roughly $158 million from 1997 to
2010.
Credit for SMTP Land Dedications and Improvements
If in the future local efforts directly overlap with the STMP projects, some form of credit
may be given to development subject to the regional fee. The WCCTAC, however, will
exercise some level of discretion over the definition of overlap. For example,most WCCC
jurisdictions require development abutting a regional route to dedicate 120 feet of right-
of-way for the route's future widening; thus, such a dedication would not be eligible for
credit. Dedications in excess of this width, however, could receive a dollar-for-dollar
credit.
A developer may also request a further reduction in fees through the governing
jurisdiction if it is the opinion of the developer that the project may generate a lower
number of trips than data provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).
The fee reduction would be based upon a traffic study. The methodology for conducting
the study shall be approved by the WCCTAC upon recommendation of the
WCCTAC-TAC.
■ Nexus Analysis
The impact of new WCCC development on regional transportation facilities is based on
an update of the WCCC Traffic Model completed by Dowling Associates, Inc. This
computer model simulates current and future traffic flows on the roadway network under
a wide range of user-specified conditions. The model is extremely useful for determining
the impact of new development on roadway levels-of-service. In particular, the model
estimates new development's fair share of the selected regional improvements by
isolating the effects of new development from those of existing development, through
(external-external) trips, and existing deficiencies. This analysis indicated that new
development will cause levels-of-service to decline despite all of the improvements
proposed in MTC's short and long range improvement plan.
As part of its STMP, the WCCTAC has evaluated the impact of new development on its
subregional system given numerous improvements programmed in the RTP. These
improvements—if all were completed by the year 2010—will increase the area's capacity
for vehicle miles of travel (VMT) by 9.4 percent. New development will increase the
number of VMT by 26 percent, thus absorbing all of the new capacity plus the capacity
freed up by a 4 percent reduction in through trips (i.e., commuters traveling through
WCCC but not stopping). Thus, the net increase in total will be 57,814 VMT. Table 6
presents the results of the VMT analysis in more detail.
2The$94 million worth of projects is composed of HOV lanes from Carquinez to Route 4$85 million
and$9 million worth of improvements to I-80 interchanges and parallel arterials.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 6
� I J
1
Table 6. VMT Analysis (1997-2010)
1997 2010 Increment Change
Total VMT 309,356 367,170 57,814 18.7%
VMT for Through Trips 72,529 69,941 (2,588) (3.6)%
Internal VMT 236,827 297,229 60,402 25.5%
VMT Capacity 577,166 631,207 54,041 9.4%
The results shown in Table 6 would justify the WCCTAC allocating 100 percent of the
STMP's total cost-roughly $64.3 million-to new development in WCCC. Fortunately,
WCCC has secured $39.8 million (or 62 percent of the total) from other sources, leaving
only$24.5 million still unfunded.
■ Fee Calculations
Fee calculations involve four steps:
• Step 1-Allocation of Costs-Determine if the total share of unfunded costs should be
allocated uniformly to all new development in the West County area, regardless of
jurisdiction,or if fees must be determined on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis.
• Step 2- Cost per Peak Hour Trip End- Calculate the cost per trip and fee schedule
based upon generating sufficient revenues to fund the $24.5 million for the STMP
Projects.
• Step 3-Preliminary Fee Schedules-Apply the cost per peak hour trip end to the trip
generation characteristics of different types of land use to create a preliminary fee
schedule.
• Step 4- Final Fee Schedule- As an alternative to the fee schedules in Step 3, create
discounted fee schedules which reduce the financial burden placed on new
development by collecting less than the full,unfunded amount.
Allocation of Costs
The total cost of the STMP improvements should be roughly balanced with the benefits
each jurisdiction receives (or impacts it causes). This balance, however, is difficult to
quantify given the complexity of travel patterns in West County and the lack of
quantitative information of transit ridership. As an alternative to a quantitative analysis,
WCCTAC has decided the STMP projects represent a reasonable balance of benefits to all
jurisdictions. Given the extensive experience of the WCCTAC membership, this
qualitative approach is a satisfactory alternative to a qualitative analysis using the
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 7
transportation model (i.e., select-link analysis of all proposed projects'). Thus, WCCTAC
has decided to apply a uniform cost per peak hour tip end across all jurisdictions.
Costs Per Peak Hour Trip End
Impact fees for West County are calculated by dividing the number of new a.m. peak
hour trip ends by the unfunded cost of STMP projects. This calculation provides a
uniform cost per peak hour trip end. The net increase of 11,587 new a.m. peak hour trip
ends by the$24.5 million all STMP projects equals about$2,100 per peak hour trip end.
Preliminary Fee Schedule
The fee amounts are determined by multiplying the cost per a.m. peak hour trip end by
the number of a.m. trips generated by a particular land use. For purposes of efficiency
and consistency, WCCTAC has limited its fee schedule to two types of residential
development (i.e., single and multi-family dwelling units) and four types of commercial
space (large and small retail, office, and industrial). Table 7 shows the trip generation
rates for each land use. In addition,it shows the adjustments for average trip length, trip
diversion, and the final adjusted trip length.
Table 7. A.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Rates and Adjustments
Base Rates Trip Diversion Trip Length Final Peak Hour
Land Use Categories Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Trips Rates
Single Family Residential 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.74
Multi Family Residential 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.47
Retail per 1,000 sq.ft. (<200 ksf) 1.60 0.20 0.50 0.16
Retail per 1,000 sq.ft. (>220 ksf) 0.80 0.45 0.50 0.18
Office per 1,000 sq. ft. 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.33
Industrial per 1,000 sq.ft. 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90
Trip diversion factors indicate the percentage of trips for each land use category that are
part of a longer trip but divert less than two miles out of the way to stop at the land use.
Trip length adjusts for trip shorter than the home-based work trips. The rates shown in
Table 7 are multiplied by the cost per peak hour trip end to produce the preliminary fee
schedule shown below. The bottom row shows the estimated amount of revenue that the
fee schedule should collect over the next 13 years.
3For each segment of regional roadway that will be improved using fee revenues,select link analysis
shows the origins and destinations of future trips. Thus, the results help allocate the benefit of the
improved roadway according to the amount of new development in each jurisdiction.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 8
ti
Table 8. Preliminary Fee Schedule (1997-2010)
Land Use Categories Full Funding for STMP Project
Single Family Residential $2,345
Multi Family Residential $1,002
Small Retail per square foot(<200,000 sq.R.) $1.37
Large Retail per square foot(>220,000 sq.ft.) $1.68
Office per square foot $2.88
Industrial per square foot. $1.92
Total Revenues ($1,000,000) $24.5
Alternative Fee Schedule
While WCCTAC may be legally entitled to levy any of the preliminary fees shown in
Table 8, there are several compelling reasons for levying a lower fee on commercial
development. West County currently has a surplus of residents and a shortage of jobs (a
jobs/housing imbalance) and intends to encourage more commercial growth to improve
the balance. Measure C states that jobs/housing balance should be considered in the
establishment of the STMT. In addition, West County jurisdictions are struggling to
attract jobs, retail services, and sales tax revenue, and believe that a fee on commercial
development any higher than 20 cents per square foot will defeat economic development
goals.
In order to reduce the financial burden placed on commercial development,the WCCTAC
has agreed to discount the fee for all commercial space to 20 cents per square foot. It also
reduced residential fees, but the reduction is not as much as for commercial uses. In
addition, the trip generation rate for multi-family units is at a higher rate than the ITE
rate. This fee schedule would generate approximately$5.1 million over the next 13 years,
roughly 21 percent of the total$24.5 million in unfunded needs.
This fee schedule sets fees far below the maximum $24.5 million funding threshold
established by the VMT Analysis and the preliminary fee schedule. These fees are shown
in Table 9.
Table 9. Fee Schedule (1997-2010)
Land Use Categories 1997 Dollars
Single Family Residential $700
Multi Family Residential $560
Retail per square foot(<200 ksf) $0.20
Retail per square foot(>220 ksf) $0.20
Office per square foot $0.20
Industrial per square foot. $0.20
Total Revenues($1,000,000) $5.1
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 9
Exhibit a
February 21, 1997
Proposed changes to the WCCTAC Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement:
A. Added two objectives regarding the Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program:
Overseeing the program and managing the Richmond Intermodal Station project.
B. Added the definition of "Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program."
C, Changed "Transportation Demand Management" to "Transportation Systems
Management" throughout the document to be consistent with the revised TSM
Ordinance.
D. The Chair of the WCCTAC-TAC is the Program Manager instead of one of the City
Managers, as requested by the previous Chair (Marilyn Uuck, Hercules City
Manager).
WEST CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
This restatement and amendment of the West Contra Costa
Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement (Agreement) is entered into on this
day of , 1997, by and between the City of El
Cerrito, a municipal corporation; the City of Hercules, a
municipal corporation; the City of Pinole, a municipal
corporation; the City of Richmond, a municipal corporation and
charter city; the City of San Pablo, a municipal corporation; the
County of Contra Costa, a political subdivision of the State of
California; the Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District , a transit
district organized and existing pursuant to the provisions of the
California Public Utilities Code; the San Francisco Bay Area
Rapid Transit District (BART) , a transit district organized and
existing pursuant to the provisions of California Public
Utilities Code; and the Western Contra Costa County Transit
Authority (WestCAT) , a joint exercise of powers transit authority
organized and existing pursuant to the provisions of the
California Public Utilities Code and Government Code Sections
6500 et seq. This amended agreement restates in full those
provisions of the original agreement, except as amended herein.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, in November 1988 , the voters of Contra Costa County
approved Measure "C" which established and funded a
transportation agenda for Contra Costa County; and
WHEREAS, in response to the adoption of Measure "C, " the
Parties to this agreement decided to formalize the previously
existing West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee as a
legal entity created to address transportation issues ; and
WHEREAS, each of the public Agencies which are a party to
this agreement, hereafter referred to collectively as the
"Parties, " has the power to address transportation issues; and
WHEREAS, each of the Parties to this agreement believes that
a combination of their separate powers and abilities may enable
them to more effectively respond to Measure "C" and to address
transportation issues; and
WHEREAS, each of the Parties to this agreement proposes by
this agreement to exercise their respective powers jointly for
the purpose of responding to the passage of Measure "C" and
addressing existing and future transportation issues ; and
1
WHEREAS, California Government Code Sections 6500 , et seq. ,
provides that two or more public Agencies by agreement may
jointly exercise any power that any one of the Agencies could
exercise separately; and
WHEREAS, the Parties to this agreement are desirous of
conferring upon a separate legal entity the necessary powers with
regard to responding to Measure "C', and for addressing
transportation issues for the benefit of each and all of the
Parties .
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES TO THIS AGREEMENT DO AGREE AS
FOLLOWS :
OBJECTIVE AND COMMISSION
The objective of this Joint Exercise of powers Agreement is
to create a city, county, transit district transportation
advisory committee which shall protect and advance the
interests of West Contra Costa County communities With
regard to transportation issues in general and the
utilization of Measure "C" funds in particular. more
specifically, the committee created by this agreement is
commissioned to:
(A) Assist member Agencies with a coordinated and
cooperative implementation of the West Contra Costa
Action Plan;
(B) Participate in the development and implementation of
the Countrywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan;
(C) Initiate "area specific" transportation studies/plans
where appropriate;
(D) Assist member Agencies with Congestion Management
Program compliance requirements ;
(E) Develop regional strategies and meet regional
requirements established by Measure 11c" ;
(F) Cooperatively address transportation issues, beyond
Measure "C" requirements, when said issues affect West
Contra Costa County interests;
(G) Assess the transportation needs of the West Contra
Costa County area;
(H) Consider the development of expanded West Contra Costa
County transit services and Transportation Systems
Management (TSM) programs ;
(I ) Advise the Parties on transportation issues;
(J) Coordinate the actions and responses of the Parties
with regard to transportation issues;
(K) Formulate transportation policy statements ;
(L) Sponsor educational forums, workshops, TSM Coordinator-
training; and discussions on transportation matters;
(M) Develop and administer a West Contra Costa Regional TSM
program to encourage use of alternatives to single
occupant commute travel ;
(N) Advise the Parties on TSM compliance issues ;
0) Oversee the Subregional Transportation Migration
Program (STMP) ; and
P) Manage the Richmond Intermodal Station project ; and
(Q) Gather information necessary to carry out the foregoing
purposes .
DEFINITIONS
Certain words as used in this agreement shall be defined as
follows :
(A) "Agency" shall mean each City and transit district and
the County which is a signatory to this agreement .
(B) "Board" shall mean the board constituted herein
pursuant to this agreement to administer and execute
this agreement .
(C) "Congestion Management Program" shall mean the State
mandated program which establishes performance
standards and requirements for the transportation
system, creates a process to analyze the impact of land
use changes on regional transportation, and creates a
capital improvement program to maintain the regional
transportation system.
(D) "Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan (CCTP) "
shall mean a countywide plan required under Measure
3
"C. " The CCTP is created from the five regional
transportation planning committee action plans and is
updated every two years .
r
) "Subreaional Transportation Mitigation Program" or
"STMP" shall refer to the program under which developer
fees are imposed on properties located in the West
Contra Costa County area for use in funding
transportation mitigation projects .
(F) "Transportation Systems Management" or "TSM" shall mean
any combination of measures that are designed to
provide information, assistance, and incentives to
employees and residents to encourage use of
alternatives to single occupant commute travel .
(G) "TSM Ordinance" shall mean the Transportation Systems
Management Ordinance (s) adopted by West Contra Costa
cities and Contra Costa County setting forth the
purpose, goal , objectives, requirements, and
responsibilities of the West Contra Costa Regional TSM
Program.
(H) "West Contra Costa Action Pian" shall mean the regional
transportation plan in West County adopted December 9,
1994 , required by Measure C, and intended to create a
framework for member agencies to jointly and
cooperatively address regional transportation issues .
(I) "West Contra Costa Regional TSM Program shall mean a
Transportation Systems Management Program managed by
the WCCTAC staff on behalf of the member cities with
the purpose of reducing vehicle trips and increasing
ridesharing and transit usage.
(,7) "West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee"
also referred to as "WCCTAC" shall mean the public and
separate entity created by this agreement .
(K) "West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee-
Technical Advisory Committee" also referred to as
"WCCTAC-TAC" shall mean the technical advisory
committee to the West Contra Costa Transportation
Advisory Committee .
HEADINGS
All headings contained herein are for convenience or
reference only and are not intended to define or limit the
scope of any provision of this Agreement .
4
EFFECTIVE DATE
This restatement and amendment of the WCCTAC Joint Exercise
of Powers Agreement shall become effective upon execution by
the Agencies .
CREATION OF WEST CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
WCCTAC was formally created as a "Joint Powers Agency" in
1990 pursuant to California Government Code Sections 6500 et
seq. Through this agreement it is hereby confirmed that the
West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee
(hereinafter referred to as "WCCTAC" ) shall exercise in the
manner hereinafter set forth the powers common to each of
the member Agencies until this agreement is amended or
terminated. WCCTAC shall be a public entity separate from
the member Agencies . No debt , liability, or obligation of
the WCCTAC shall constitute a debt, liability, or obligation
of any member Agency. Each Agency' s obligation hereunder is
expressly limited only to the appropriation and contribution
of such funds as the parties hereto may agree to and direct
in accordance with this agreement .
POWERS
The powers of the WCCTAC shall include and be limited to the
following:
(A) to annually adopt a work program along with a budget
setting forth all operational expenses for WCCTAC,
together with an apportionment of expenses allocated to
each Agency. The work program and budget of the WCCTAC
shall be prepared by April 1 and shall be submitted for
review to each member Agency prior to its adoption on
or about July 1 . Each member Agency shall provide
comments to WCCTAC staff concerning the WCCTAC work
program and budget by June 1 .
(B) to make and enter into contracts ;
(C) to apply for and accept grants, advances, and
contributions;
(D) to employ or contract for the services of agents,
consultants, engineers , attorneys, and such other
persons or firms as it deems necessary to carry out the
objectives of this agreement ;
5
(E) to conduct studies ;
(F) to develop and administer the West Contra Costa
Regional TSM program;
(G) to periodically review transportation plans and TSM
programs and ordinances, and recommend changes thereto;
and
(H) to incur debts, liabilities, or obligations, subject to
limitations herein set forth.
BOUNDARIES
The boundaries of WCCTAC shall be the boundaries as shown in
Appendix A which is attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference .
OVERALL ORGANIZATION
The WCCTAC Board shall provide overall policy direction for
the coordinated implementation of the West Contra Costa
Action Plan and decision making for general WCCTAC
operations including implementation of the West Contra Costa
Regional TSM Program. The WCCTAC-TAC shall provide
administrative guidance and technical review to the Board.
Staff or consultants hired by WCCTAC shall report directly
to the WCCTAC Program Manager with consultation by the
WCCTAC-TAC.
WCCTAC ORGANIZATION
(A) WCCTAC Board
WCCTAC shall be governed by the WCCTAC Board which
shall exercise all powers and authority on behalf of
WCCTAC. The Board is empowered to establish its own
procedures . The Board may do any and all things
necessary to carry out the purposes of this Agreement . ,
(1) Members
(a) The Board shall consist of ten members which
shall be allocated in the following manner:
(i) Three members shall be appointed by
the governing body of the City of
Richmond;
6
The governing bodies of the cities
of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole and
San Pablo and the County of Contra
Costa shall each appoint one
member;
The governing body of BART shall
appoint one member; and
(iv) The governing bodies of AC Transit
and WestCAT shall jointly appoint
one member to serve on the Board.
(b) Upon execution of this agreement, the
governing body of each Agency shall appoint
the appropriate number of its elected
officials to serve as members of the Board
and an appropriate number of its elected
officials to serve as alternate member (s) of
the Board to serve in the absence of its
regular appointees . Each member and
alternate shall hold office from the first
meeting of the Board after appointment until
a successor is selected. Each member and
alternate shall serve at the pleasure of the
governing body or bodies of the appointing
Agency or Agencies . If a member or alternate
ceases to be an elected official of the
member Agency, he or she shall then be
ineligible to serve an the WCCTAC Board, and
the Agency shall appoint a successor prior to
the next Board meeting. Each member and
alternate shall serve without compensation.
(2 ) officers
The WCCTAC Board members shall select from the
WCCTAC Board a Chair and vice Chair who shall hold
office for a period of one year, commencing July
1; provided however, that in the event that a
member Agency removes from the Board a member
serving as an officer, the Board shall appoint a
member from the newly constituted Board to fill
the vacant office for the remainder of that fiscal
year.
(a) Chair, The Chair shall preside at the
meetings of the Board, call meetings to
order, adjourn meetings, announce the
business and the order it is to be acted
upon, recognize persons entitled to the
floor, put to vote all questions , moved and
seconded, announce result of votes, maintain
the rules of order, execute documents and
official actions on behalf of the Board when
duly approved, and carry out other duties set
forth in the by-laws .
(b) Vice Chair. The Vice Chair shall serve as
Chair in the absence of the regularly elected
Chair .
(c) Secretary. WCCTAC shall employ or contract
for the services of a Secretary who shall
prepare, distribute, and maintain minutes of
meetings of the WCCTAC Board, the WCCTAC-TAC
and any committees of the WCCTAC. The
Secretary shall also maintain the official
records of the WCCTAC and shall file notices
as required by Paragraph 18 of this
Agreement .
(d) Treasurer. WCCTAC shall employ or contract
for the services of a Treasurer who shall ;
W Report to the WCCTAC Program
Manager;
(ii) Receive and provide for the receipt
of all funds of the WCCTAC and
place them in the treasury to the
credit and for the account of the
WCCTAC;
(iii) Be responsible, upon an official
bond, for the safekeeping and
disbursement of all funds of the
WCCTAC;
(iv) Pay, when due, out of funds of the
WCCTAC, all sums payable on
outstanding Revenue Bonds and other
indebtedness of the WCCTAC;
(v) Pay any other sum duly authorized
for payment from funds of the
WCCTAC;
(vi) Verify and report, in writing, on
the first day of July, October,
January, and April of each year to
the Board and each Member, as of
the end of the preceding month, the
amount of funds held for the
Authority, the amount of receipts
since the last report and the
amount paid out since the last
report; and
{vii} Invest WCCTAC' s funds in the manner
provided by law and collect
interest thereon for the account of
the WCCTAC.
(c) vote
{i} Authorized Voting Members
Each member or designated alternate
shall be authorized to vote.
WCCTAC Business
For purposes of decisions related
to the regular business of the
WCCTAC, including policy decisions,
preparation of budgets and
expenditures of funds , the City of
Richmond shall have three votes;
the cities of E1 Cerrito, Hercules,
Pinole and San Pablo and the County
of Contra Costa shall have one vote
apiece; BART shall have one vote;
and AC Transit and WestCAT shall
jointly have one vote . A majority
vote of six shall be required for
the adoption of any course of
action related to the regular
business of the WCCTAC.
Appointment of Representatives to
the Contra Costa Transportation
Authority
Decisions related to determining
WCCTAC appointments to the Contra
Costa Transportation Authority
shall be made only by the
participating City and County
jurisdictions . In these cases ,
participating cities and the County
shall each have one vote . A
majority vote of four shall be
9
required for any WCCTAC decision
related to appointment of
representatives to the Contra Costa
Transportation Authority.
(d Meetings of the Board
(i) Regular Meetings
The Board shall meet at least ten
times per year. The date, hour and
place at which each such regular
meeting will be held shall be
determined by a majority vote by
the Board.
(ii) Special Meetings
Special meetings of the Board may
be called in accordance with the
provisions of Section 54956 of the
California Government Code .
(iii) Notice of Meetings
All meetings of the Board shall be
held subject to the provisions of
the Ralph M. Brown Act , being
California Government Code Sections
54950 , et seq. , and other
applicable laws of the State of
California requiring notice of
meetings of public bodies to be
given.
{iv) Minutes
The Board shall cause minutes of
all meetings to be kept and shall
distribute the minutes in the next
Board agenda packet (or sooner if
requested by the Chair) to each
member of the Board and to each
Agency.
Ouorum
A majority of the members of the
Board shall constitute a quorum for
the transaction of business .
10
(e) Bylaws
The Board shall adopt from time to time such
bylaws , rules or regulations for the conduct
of its affairs as may be required.
(B) WCCTAC STAFF
(1) Composition
The WCCTAC shall have a staff consisting of a
Program Manager who shall serve as primary staff
person, a Transportation Project Specialist and
clerical support . In addition, independent
consultants may be engaged on a continuing or
short-term basis , as needed.
(2) Additional Staff
Additional staff may be added with Board approval
within the constraints of the then current fiscal
year budget .
(C) WCCTAC-TAC ORGANIZATION
(1) Composition
The WCCTAC shall have a technical advisory
committee which shall be known as the WCCTAC-TAC
and which shall be composed of the City Managers
of the participating cities or said City Managers '
designees; the District managers of the
participating transit authorities or said District
Managers' designees; and the County Administrator
for Contra Costa County or said County
Administrator' s designee . The WCCTAC-TAC shall be
chaired by the WCCTAC Program Manager.
(2) Duties
The WCCTAC-TAC shall study and discuss issues
pertaining to WCCTAC and shall make
recommendations to the WCCTAC concerning those
issues. However, the role of the WCCTAC-TAC in
making recommendations to the WCCTAC shall not be
deemed to preclude the WCCTAC from considering
recommendations from other bodies and concerned
individuals .
(3) Officers
The WCCTAC-TAC shall be chaired by the WCCTAC
Program Manager .
10 . SUPPORT 2ERVICES
Each of the Agencies shall strive to provide the necessary
support to the Board as may be necessary for the Board to
fulfill its duties .
11 . RESTRICTIONS UPON EXERCISE OF POWER OF BOARD
This agreement is entered into under the provisions of Title
1 , Division 7, Chapter 5 , Article I , Section 6500 , et seq. ,
of the California Government Code, concerning joint powers
agreements . The powers to be exercised hereunder shall be
subject to the restrictions upon the manner of exercising
the power of the City of San Pablo.
12 . FUNDS AUDIT AND ACCOUNTING SERVICES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 6505 . 5 of the
Government Code, the Finance Division Manager of the City of
San Pablo is designated to be the depositary and to have
custody of all WCCTAC funds from whatever source, and to
perform the following functions, unless the WCCTAC Board
determines otherwise . Fiscal responsibilities shall include
the following:
(A) Receive and receipt for all money for WCCTAC for the
credit of the Board;
(B) Be responsible upon official bond for the safekeeping
and disbursement of all Board money so held;
(C) Pay any sums due from the Board from Board money, or
any portion thereof, only upon warrants of the WCCTAC
Program Manager. There shall be a limit of $10 , 000 on
the amount of warrants which can be issued without
Board approval .
(D) The Finance Division Manager of the City of San Pablo
shall be considered the Treasurer of WCCTAC funds
unless otherwise determined by the WCCTAC Board. The
Treasurer of WCCTAC funds shall have custody of all
WCCTAC funds and shall verify and report in writing on
the first day of October, January, and April of each
12
a !
year; and within ninety (90) days after the close of
the fiscal year ended June 30th, to the Board and to
the participating Agencies to this agreement, the
amount of money the Treasurer holds for the Board, the
amount of receipts, and the amount paid out since the
last report to the Board. The audit of funds shall be
conducted annually in compliance with Section 5505 of
the Government Code by an independent certified public
accountant qualified to perform on behalf of the joint
power authorities . There shall be strict
accountability of all funds and reporting to the Board
of all receipts and disbursements . in each case the
minimum requirements of the audit shall be those
prescribed by the State Controller for municipalities
or counties and the audit shall conform to generally
accepted auditing standards .
(E) The Program Manager and the Treasurer are hereby
designated as the persons who have charge of and access
to the property of WCCTAC. Each such person shall file
with the Board an official bond in an amount to be
fixed by the Board. The costs of the bonds shall be
paid by WCCTAC.
13 . OBLIGATIONS OF THE AGENCIES
Each Agency shall :
(A) Be liable to the WCCTAC for, upon demand, its
proportionate share of expenses based upon the budget
adopted by the WCCTAC and member Agencies. Invoices
shall be prepared by the WCCTAC Program Manager. The
proportionate share of each Agency shall be determined
according to the following formula :
City of Richmond 30%
City of El Cerrito 10%
City of Hercules 10%
City of Pinole 10%
City of San Pablo 10%
County of Contra Costa 10%
San Francisco Bay Area
Rapid Transit District 109.
Alameda-Contra Costa
Transit District 9%
WestCAT 1%
(B) The WCCTAC shall recommend a budget to member Agencies
each Fiscal Year. Based upon the formula set forth in
Paragraph (A) above, during the Fiscal Years !993
13
through 1996 , the proportionate share of each member
Agency' s annual share shall not exceed the following:
City of Richmond $28 , 500
City of E1 Cerrito 9 , 500
City of Hercules 9 , 500
City of Pinole 9, 500
City of San Pablo 9, 500
County of Contra Costa 9 , 500
San Francisco Bay Area
Rapid Transit District 9, 500
Alameda-Contra Costa
Transit District 8 , 550
WestCAT 950
TOTAL $95 , 000
(C) Commencing on July 1, 1994 , and continuing with each
July 1 thereafter, the WCCTAC shall approve a budget
which reflects the annual costs and the proportionate
share of required funding to be provided by each member
Agency.
(D) WCCTAC members shall be invoiced annually in May in
advance for the next fiscal year and their share shall
be payable immediately.
14 . DISPOSITION OF WCCTAC FUNDS UPON TERMINATION
WCCTAC funds, including any interest earned on deposits,
remaining upon termination of this agreement after payment
of all obligations, shall be returned in proportion to the
contribution made by each Agency during the term of this
Agreement . Decisions of the Board shall be final in this
regard.
15 . WITHDRAWAL
Any Agency upon sixty (60) days' written notice given to the
Chair of WCCTAC may withdraw from this agreement ; provided,
however, that the withdrawing Agency shall be liable for its
proportionate share of any expenses incurred, up to the date
that notice of termination is received, which exceeds the
withdrawing Agency' s contribution. under Paragraph 13 ; and
provided further that, in no event shall a withdrawing
Agency be entitled to a refund of all or any part of its
contribution made under Paragraph 13 .
14
16 . TERMINATION
(A) This agreement shall remain in effect indefinitely
unless amended or terminated as provided hereunder.
(13) This agreement may be terminated by the affirmative
vote of the governing bodies of not less than two-
thirds of all member Agencies .
17 . AMENDMENTS
This agreement may be amended by the affirmative vote of the
governing bodies of not less than two-thirds of all member
Agencies .
18 . NOTICES
All notices to Agencies shall be deemed to have been given
when mailed to the governing body of each Agency. Notices
to WCCTAC shall be sent to the WCCTAC Board at :
WCCTAC
One Alvarado Square
San Pablo, CA 94806
19 . FILINGS WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE
Within 30 days of the effective date of this agreement , the
Chair of WCCTAC shall file with the Office of the California
Secretary of State a Notice of a Joint Powers Agreement for
WCCTAC pursuant to California Government Code Sections
6505 . 3 and 6505 . 7, and a Statement of Facts - Roster of
Public Agencies Filing pursuant to California Government
Code Section 53051 .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, these signatures attest the parties'
agreement to the provisions of this Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement .
15
CITY OF EL CERRITO
Executed on 1997 , at
California .
Attest :
Mayor
City Manager
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
16
a ? _
CITY OF HERCULES
Executed on 1997 , at
California .
Attest :
Mayor
City Manager
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
17
CITY OF PINOLE
Executed on 1997 , at
California .
Attest :
Mayor
City Manager
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
18
CITY OF RICHMOND
Executed on 1997 , at
California.
Attest :
Mayor
City Manager
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
19
CITY OF SAN PABLO
Executed on 1997, at
California.
Attest :
Mayor
City Manager
City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
20
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
Executed on 1997 , at
California ,
Attest :
Chair, Board of Supervisors
County Administrator
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Approved as to form:
County Counsel
21
p 1
ALAMEDA-CONTRA COSTA TRANSIT DISTRICT
Executed on 1997, at
California .
Attest :
Board Chair
District Manager
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to form:
Legal Counsel
22
SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT DISTRICT
Executed on 1997, at
California .
Attest :
Board Chair
District Manager
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to form:
Legal Counsel
23
WESTERN CONTRA COSTA COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITX
Executed on 1997, at
California .
Attest :
Board Chair
Authority Manager
Clerk of the Board
Approved as to form:
Legal Counsel
24
f
« U
I . `p
F
n �
• 1
r' rrtt
`D v 1I N
V Ii> yy
/f C Yt (�X�I 'i CCZ1
n
` n
4 �
ii � Qe t
4
O
C o\G m Qada
a 4 4`t e
a
o- a ,valid o <
t
M
too
e
e �
N ) = e
rt o 0 0010 F
o e a
co
i\ rs art ~
b
ti J J
C
o g� z
'FkCy 9i tB'. �
£ 9
a
FY 97-98 BUDGET AND WORK PLAN WILL BE
INSERTED WHEN APPROVED BY WCCTAC
A i
1
Exhibit E
MASTER COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
THE CITIES OF EL CERRITO, HERCULES. PINOLE,
RICHMOND, AND SAN PABLO
THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
AND THE
WEST CONTRA COSTA TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE
This AGREEMENT is made and entered into as of this day of
1997, by and between the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (OCTA), hereinafter
referred to as AUTHORITY; the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San
Pablo and the County of Contra Costa, collectively referred to herein as SPONSORS; and
the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory committee, hereinafter referred to as
WCCTAC.
RECITALS
WHEREAS, AUTHORITY, SPONSORS, and WCCTAC, pursuant to the Contra Costa
Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Expenditure Plan and Ordinance
(referred to herein as "Measure C") program adopted and approved by the voters in 1988,
hereby desire to enter into a Cooperative AGREEMENT for transportation improvements in
Contra Costa County specifically as a result of developer fees collected under the West
County Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP);
WHEREAS, fees from the STMP will partially fund three transportation projects:
L HIGHWAY 4 WEST.
2. EL CERRITO PLAZA BART STATION PARKING STRUCTURE.
3. RICHMOND INTERMODAL STATION FACILITIES ENHANCEMENT
PROGRAM.
WHEREAS, the AUTHORITY has been designated as the oversight agency for the
Measure C programs and projects;
WHEREAS, this Cooperative AGREEMENT outlines the roles and responsibilities relative
to the administrative and fiscal management of the STMP projects.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, AUTHORITY, SPONSORS, and
WCCTAC do hereby agree as follows:
1
1 '
A. PURPOSE
The purpose of this Cooperative AGREEMENT is to formalize the institutional
arrangements for the collection and oversight of the STMP fees.
B. FEES
1. Imposition of the Fees. The following STMP fees are payable to the
SPONSORS at the time of issuance of a building permit:
UNIT TYPE FEES
Single family residential. $700/dwelling unit
Individual units and duet homes with
one shared wall, and residential
condominiums.
Multi family residential. $560/dwelling unit
Commercial, office, industrial, retail. $.20 per square foot of
gross floor area
Other uses not identified above. $150 per trip generated
2. Transfer of the Fees.
On a quarterly basis, fee revenue will be transferred from the SPONSORS to
AUTHORITY, with a brief Quarterly Report which describes the revenue and
any fee reductions granted by the SPONSOR. AUTHORITY will deposit the
funds into an interest-bearing account for the STMP revenues to be used solely
for the purposes described herein. The revenues will be disbursed for the
three projects outlined below.
3. Oversight of the Projects.
AUTHORITY is responsible for oversight of the Measure C projects in the
STMP: Highway 4 West and the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station Parking
Structure. WCCTAC will oversee the Richmond Intermodal Station
project through an amendment to the existing WCCTAC Joint Exercise of
Powers Agreement.
2
a I .
4. Ten percent of the fees raised will be transferred to WCCTAC for the
Richmond Intermodal Station project, as well as 11h percent of the fee revenue
for administrative oversight.
5. AUTHORITY will provide quarterly reports to SPONSORS regarding the
fees collected and disbursed for the project(s), interest earned, and fees
disbursed for project oversight and/or legal fees. Accrued interest on funds
for the STMP projects shah be deemed available for any lawful purpose under
this AGREEMENT.
C. LIST OF PROJECTS
1. highway 4 West. Construct safety improvements, upgrades, and widening
between Interstate 80 and Cummings Skyway, consistent with Measure C.
2. EI Cerrito Plaza BART Station Parking Structure. Acquisition of 2.7 acres
of the El Cerrito Plaza Shopping Center and enhancements to the parking
structure to create direct pedestrian connections to both the Plaza BART
Station platform and intermodal area.
3. Richmond Intermodal Station Facilities Enhancement Program. Construct
improvements and enhance access to the Richmond Intermodal Station which
will increase utilization of all transportation modes including BART, Amtrak,
Capitol Corridor trains, bus transit, bicycling, and pedestrian.
D. FUNDING COMMITMENTS AND ELIGIBLE COSTS
1. Fee revenues shall be available for all necessary project costs through
completion of construction. Costs include, but are not limited to,
environmental clearance, conceptual engineering, traffic studies, design, right
of way acquisition, utility relocation, litigation and settlement costs, and costs
of construction. Funding amounts are in 1997 dollars and actual funding
commitments will depend upon regional fee revenues.
Proiect Regional Fee Commitment Total Est. Cost
Highway 4 West $4,080,000 $48,000,000
EI Cerrito Plaza
BART Parking Structure $ 510,000 $ 6,000,000
Richmond Intermodal
Station Improvements $ 510,000 $ 7,000,404
3
f '
2. AUTHORITY may advance funds for the projects identified in this
AGREEMENT. Any funds advanced by the AUTHORITY will be
reimbursed from the revenues collected.
E. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE
Subject to environmental clearance, right of way acquisition and dedication, utility
relocation, and other factors (the timing of which may be beyond the control of
AUTHORITY, SPONSORS or WCCTAC), and subject to the availability of
regional fee and other funding sources as may be required, the following
implementation guidelines shall apply to project development:
1. The Highway 4 West improvements shall be designed to match other
Measure C, local, state, and federal funds to promote timely implementation
of the improvements. It is the parties' intent that the Highway 4 West project
be given construction priority from funds available through the STMP and that
eighty percent (80%) of the funds collected will be used for the Highway 4
West project.
2. Funding for the El Cerrito Plaza BART Parking Structure improvements
and the Richmond Intermodal Station improvements will be determined at a
later date, subject to scheduled need. Twenty percent (20%) of the funds
collected will be distributed equally to these two transit projects.
F. ADMINISTRATIVE OVERSIGHT COSTS AND REIMBURSEMENT
1. AUTHORITY may use up to one and one-half percent (11/2%) of the fee
revenues allocated for Highway 4 West Project and the El Cerrito Plaza
BART Station Parking Structure projects for the cost of administering the
fee program for AUTHORITY'S oversight of said projects.
2. WCCTAC may use up to one and one-half percent (11/2) of the fee revenues
allocated for the Richmond Intermodal Station improvements for WCCTAC's
oversight of the said project.
G. TERM
The term of this AGREEMENT shall commence on 1997, and
shall terminate on December 31, 2010.
H. TERMINATION
1. This AGREEMENT will remain in effect until terminated in accordance with
the provisions of the AGREEMENT. However, in no event shall the parties
4
to this AGREEMENT terminate this AGREEMENT if such a termination
would conflict with or violate the terms or conditions of any Revenue Bonds.
2. This AGREEMENT will remain in effect until terminated by agreement of
all parties to this AGREEMENT.
I. INDEMNIFICATION
1. AUTHORITY shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless WCCTAC;
the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo; and the
County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents and employees from any and all
claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations
performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the
sole negligence of WCCTAC, El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond, San
Pablo, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or employees.
2. WCCTAC shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless AUTHORITY;
the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo; and the
County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents and employees from any and all
claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations
performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the
sole negligence of AUTHORITY, El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond,
San Pablo, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or employees.
3. El Cerrito shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless AUTHORITY;
WCCTAC; the cities of Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo; and the
County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents or employees from any and all
claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations
performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the
sole negligence of AUTHORITY, WCCTAC, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond,
San Pablo, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or employees.
4. Hercules shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless AUTHORITY;
WCCTAC; the cities of El Cerrito, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo; and the
County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents or employees from any and all
claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations
performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the
sole negligence of AUTHORITY, WCCTAC, El Cerrito, Pinole, Richmond,
San Pablo, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or employees.
5. Pinole shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless AUTHORITY;
WCCTAC; the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Richmond and San Pablo; and
the County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents or employees from any and
all claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any
5
operations performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising
out of the sole negligence of AUTHORITY, WCCTAC, El Cerrito, Hercules.
Richmond, San Pablo, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or
employees.
6. Richmond shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless AUTHORITY;
WCCTAC; the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole and San Pablo; and the
County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents or employees from any and all
claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations
performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the
sole negligence of AUTHORITY, WCCTAC, El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole,
San Pablo, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or employees.
7. San Pablo shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless AUTHORITY;
WCCTAC; the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole and Richmond; and the
County of Contra Costa; their officers, agents or employees from any and all
claims, costs and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations
performed under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the
sole negligence of AUTHORITY, WCCTAC, El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole,
Richmond, Contra Costa County, or their officers, agents or employees.
8. Contra Costa County shall defend, indemnify, save and hold harmless
AUTHORITY; WCCTAC; the cities of El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole and
Richmond; their officers, agents or employees from any and all claims, costs
and liability arising out of or in connection with any operations performed
under this AGREEMENT, except for liability arising out of the sole
negligence of AUTHORITY, WCCTAC, El Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole,
Richmond, or their officers, agents or employees.
J. NOTICES
Any notices which many be required under this AGREEMENT shall be in writing,
shall be effective when received, and shall be given by personal service, by certified
or registered mail, or by U.S. mail, to the City Managers of the cities of El Cerrito,
Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo; to the Board Clerk for the County of
Contra Costa; and to the individuals and addresses set forth below, or to such other
addresses which may be specified in writing by the parties hereto.
Lisa Hogeboom
Program Manager
WCCTAC
One Alvarado Square
San Pablo, CA 94806
6
Robert K. McCleary
Executive Director
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
1340 Treat Boulevard, #150
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
K. ADDITIONAL ACTS AND DOCUMENTS
Each party agrees to do all such things and take all such actions, and to make,
execute and deliver such other documents and instruments, as shall be reasonably
requested to carry out the provisions, intent, and purpose of the AGREEMENT.
L. INTEGRATION
This AGREEMENT represents the entire AGREEMENT of the parties with respect
to the subject matter hereof. No representations, warranties, inducements, or oral
agreements have been made by any of the parties except as expressly set forth herein,
or in other contemporaneous written agreements.
M. AMENDMENT
This AGREEMENT may not be changed, modified, or rescinded except in writing,
signed by all parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this
AGREEMENT shall be void and of no effect.
N. INDEPENDENT AGENCIES
1. AUTHORITY renders its services under this AGREEMENT as an
independent agency.
2. None of the AUTHORITY'S agents or employees shall be agents or
employees of the SPONSORS or WCCTAC.
3. None of the SPONSOR'S agents or employees shall be agents or employees of
the AUTHORITY.
4. None of WCCTAC'S agents or employees shall be agents or employees of
AUTHORITY.
O. ASSIGNMENT
This AGREEMENT may not be assigned, transferred, hypothecated, or pledged by
any party without the express written consent of the other party.
7
. J .
P. BINDING ON SUCCESSORS, ETC.
This AGREEMENT shall be binding upon the successor(s), assignee(s), or
transferee(s) of the AUTHORITY, the SPONSORS, or WCCTAC as the case may
be. This provision shall not be construed as an authorization to assign, transfer,
hypothecate, or pledge this AGREEMENT other than as provided above.
Q. SEVERABILITY
Should any part of this AGREEMENT be determined to be unenforceable, invalid, or
beyond the authority of either party to enter into or carry out, such determination
shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this AGREEMENT which shall
continue in full force and effect; provided that, the remainder of this AGREEMENT
can, absent the excised portion, be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the
intentions of the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be duly
executed and attested by their respective officers, duly authorized so to act, as of the date set
forth in the first paragraph of this AGREEMENT.
Contra Costa Transportation Authority City of El Cerrito
Chair Mayor
ATTEST:
Executive Director
Legal Counsel City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
8
f .
City of Hercules City of Richmond
Mayor Mayor
ATTEST: ATTEST:
City Clerk City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
City of Pinole City of San Pablo
Mayor Mayor
ATTEST: ATTEST:
City Clerk City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney City Attorney
9
1 -
County of Contra Costa West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory
Committee
Chair, Board of Supervisors Chair
ATTEST: ATTEST:
Board Clerk Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM:
County Counsel Legal Counsel
10
Exhibit F
COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
MARTNEZ,CALWOPMA
Dns: March 24, 1997
To: Harvey E. Bragdon, Director of Community Development
Attn: Pat Roche, Transportation Planning
From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel
By: David F. Schmidt, Deputy County Counsel
Fm: Documents for the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation
Impact Fee Mitigation Program
As requested in your 2-28-97 memo, we have reviewed the draft
ordinance, draft Master Cooperative Agreement and the proposed
amendments to the WCCTAC Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement. Our
comments follow:
1. The ordinance submitted with your memo does not follow the format
and does not cite the legal authorities normally used by the County
for road fee areas (areas of benefit; see County Ordinance Code
Division 913) . In place of that ordinance, we have drafted a
proposed ordinance for the County using the Eastern Contra Costa
Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee ordinance as a model
(see attached) . Please review the attached draft ordinance and
contact us to discuss it (especially Sections IV, V, IX and X) .
2. As discussed with you on the telephone, the ordinance submitted
with your memo contains many provisions that are not normally
included in County ordinances and that do not properly belong there
(see recitals and circled provisions) . Those provisions that
require the parties to do certain things with respect to the STMP
and fees should be inserted in the WCCTAC JEPA, either in the body
of that agreement or as an exhibit. For a sample, you may wish to
refer to the joint exercise of powers agreement between the County,
Danville and San Ramon relating to Tassajara Valley transportation
improvements. Other provisions that give background information
could be inserted in the JEPA or in a resolution that the County
and the other parties would adopt at the same time as the ordinance
(see attached copy of resolution used for Eastern Contra Costa Sub-
Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee) . Once you have had the
opportunity to consider this issue further, please call us to
discuss it in more detail.
3. We have made a couple of minor changes to the Master Cooperative
Agreement. However, the big issue is the adequacy of the
indemnification provisions contained in Section I of the agreement.
Memo to Patrick Roche
March 24, 1997
As we explained to you on the telephone, although the
indemnification provisions appear to be reciprocal, they may not
prove to be adequate to protect the County in a situation where a
claim or loss is allegedly caused by the concurrent negligence of
the County and one or more other parties to the agreement. For
example, if design plans are reviewed by the County and another
party and a claim later results, the other party or the Authority
could potentially refuse to defend the County, arguing that the
County has an obligation under Section I.8 to defend and indemnify
in all cases where the County is concurrently negligent.
One way to resolve this potential problem would be to delete
Section I.B. However, it is doubtful that the Authority and
the other parties would agree to this.
Another approach would be to have each project sponsor defend and
indemnify the other parties against all claims arising from the
project, except to the extent caused by another party's active
negligence. However, if the County will be a project sponsor
(Highway 4 West project) , this arrangement may not be an
improvement from the County's standpoint.
Still another approach for the County would be to shift liability
to the State by requiring the State to defend and indemnify the
County and the other parties against all claims arising from the
Highway 4 West project. However, in previous projects on state
highways, the County has not been very successful in shifting
liability to the State.
Once you have had the opportunity to consider this issue further,
please call us to discuss the approach that you would like to
pursue on behalf of the.
4. The draft ordinance forwarded with your 2-28-97 memo does not
contain express language that would prevent a party, including the
County, from reducing or rescinding the fees listed in the
ordinance. If this is of concern to the County, appropriate
language could be inserted in the JEPA (see 02 above) .
DFS/
Attachments
-2-
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: April 1, 1997
TO: Jeanne Maglio, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
attn.: Shirley Casillas
FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon, Director of Community Developmpnt�
by: Patrick Roche, Transportation Planning Division 'P
SUBJECT: West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit
The Board of Supervisors have noticed a public hearing for Tuesday, April 15, 1997 to consider an
ordinance establishing a West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of
Benefit (see attached notice).
In accordance with the Government Code and County policy, attached are the following items for
the public review file:
1. A draft ordinance establishing the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation
Fee Area of Benefit.
2. Development Program Report for the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation
Mitigation Fee(Apri11. 1997), prepared by the Community Development Department and
Public Works Department in accordance with the Board of Supervisors' Policy on Bridge
Crossings and Major Thoroughfares (adopted July 17, 1997).
3. Nexus Analysis for the West Contra Costa County Subregional Transportation
Mitigation Program (February 19971, prepared by Cambridge Systematics and Dowling
Associates for the West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) in
accordance with the requirements of AB 1600 and several recent court decisions.
Should members of the public have questions regarding the material in the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit file, please have them contact me at
(510) 335-1242. Thank you for your assistance in this matter.
attachments (3 items)
1. Draft Ordinance
2. Development Program Report
3. Nexus Analysis
cc: S. Goetz, CDD-TPD
J. Bueren, PVVD-TE
D. Schmidt, Co. Counsel
PR\j:rrocb\wcctac\cobmem
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
FOR THE
WEST CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE
Prepared By and For The:
Contra Costa County Community Development Department
and
Contra Costa County Public Works Department
.--ns
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
April 1, 1997
a `
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . 1
BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
PURPOSE OF AND NEED OF PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
PROJECT DESCRIPTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
PROJECT SCHEDULING AND STAGING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
FEE AREA BOUNDARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PURPOSE OF THE FEE PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9
USE OF THE FEES .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. . . . . . 11
GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11
BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13
CALCULATION OF FEE SCHEDULE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14
FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PROJECT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
TRANSFER OF FEE PROGRAM REVENUE TO LEAD AGENCY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15
ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
COLLECTION OF FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
INTEREST ON FEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
IN LIEU DEDICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16
LIST OF FIGURES
PAGE
FIGURE 1 GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT 2
FIGURE 2 SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE I 7
FIGURE 3 SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE 11 8
FIGURE 4 MAP OF PROPOSED FEE PROGRAM AREA BOUNDARY 10
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1 ABAG FORECAST OF WEST COUNTY 12
PROJECTED POPULATION (1997-2010)
TABLE 2 ABAG FORECAST OF WEST COUNTY 12
PROJECTED EMPLOYMENT (1997-2010)
TABLE 3 A.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (1997-2010) 13
TABLE 4 PROPOSED FEE PROGRAM RATES 14
TABLE 5 FEE PROGRAM COMMITMENT TOWARD PROJECT 15
LIST OF EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF FEE AREA 17
-ii-
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM REPORT
FOR THE WEST CONTRA COSTA
SUB-REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE
INTRODUCTION
This Development Program Report outlines the concept, methodology, and procedure for
implementing the West Contra Costa Sub-Regional Transportation Mitigation Fee. The
purpose of this report is to outline a program to augment funding for the design and
construction of safety and route continuity improvements to the western segment of
highway on State Route 4 West between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 80.
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 1991, the need to establish funding programs
to ensure that new growth pay for expanding or upgrading public infrastructure was
included in the Contra Costa County General Plan. Adoption of this fee will assist the
County in complying with both of these requirements.
The remainder of this report explains the means of providing funds for the design and
construction of road safety and continuity improvements to State Route 4 West, which will
serve planned growth within the general West County area.
This Development Program Report is required by the County Board of Supervisors' Policy
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.
1
BACKGROUND
State Route 4 begins at the interchange with Interstate 80 (1-80) near the northwestely
limits of Contra Costa County and proceeds along an east-west route for 31 miles to
connect with State Route 160 in Antioch. State Route 4 is one of two east-west corridors
in Contra Costa County which links major employment centers, vital industries,
educational, governmental, and recreational facilities, and residential developments in
eastern, central, and western subareas of the County. It serves as a key route for
intercounty and interregional truck freight movement. Within this 31-mile stretch, State
Route 4 is predominantly a divided freeway with a minimum of two lanes in each direction,
except for the 4.7 mile section between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway, which is a two-lane
undivided highway extending through the Franklin Canyon area to the City of Hercules.
This section of State Route 4 West is an at-grade, undivided two-lane highway with
restricted sight distances and nonstandard shoulder widths and curves radii. It is located
adjacent to the two-lane highway is land set aside for grazing agricultural, industrial,
recreational, and residential uses which currently have limited access to the highway.
An improvements to this 4.7 mile section of State Route 4, which included construction of
a freeway, was studied as early as 1958. In April 1985, the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) prepared a Route Concept Report for State Route 4 that
recommended the 4.7 mile two-lane, undivided section of the highway between 1-80 and
Cummings Skyway be upgraded to a six-lane divided freeway with extra hill climbing lanes
to accommodate increased volume of trailer-truck traffic and peak hour commuter traffic.
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority has most recently completed a Major
Investment Study (MIS) for this section of State Route 4 West which evaluated the
technical and cost effectiveness of various transportation strategies for this corridor. The
MIS concluded that this section of the highway should be upgraded to a four-lane divided
highway and ultimately as travel demand warrants and funding becomes available it should
be further improved to a full freeway configuration. '
In 1988, the voters of Contra Costa conveyed their support for the State Route 4 West Gap
Closure Project by approving a % cent sales tax (Measure C), a portion of which was
designated to help fund a freeway gap closure project. The project, as outlined in the
ballot measure, included widening and improving the 4.7 mile section of State Route 4 to
a full freeway. FIGURE 1 shows the general location of the project.
1 mor Investment Study:Route 4 Gap from 1-80 to Cummings Skyway in Contra Costa County,
prepared by Mark Thomas&Co.for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority(March 10, 1995)
2
FIGURE 1
GENERAL LOCATION OF THE PROJECT
Route 4 Gap
From 1-80 to Cummings Skyway
in Contra Costa County
VA EJO
4,
1
, al
a tk MARTINEZ
_..__ 4
HERCULES CONCORD
RICHMOND
WALNUT CREEK
4
*xa„
5
�� ��•y� BERKELEY
V,.
y
� � OAI NO
SAN FRA O'
I�
Contra Costa
Transportation Authority
3
PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR THE PROJECT
The purpose of the proposed project is to enhance safety, to alleviate existing and
projected peak hour traffic congestion, and to improve operations on the 4.7 mile (7.6
kilometers) segment of State Route 4 between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway. This project
is most often referred to as the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project.
SAFETY:
The western section of State Route 4 has a high volume of trailer truck traffic
(approximately 11 percent of total traffic volume) and has many access points to local
businesses and residences. Safety improvements are needed in the 4.7 mile segment
between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway to address the following conditions:
1) Substandard shoulder widths and curve radii and restricted sight distances;
2) Vehicles turning left into and out of businesses and residences which now must
cross onto the highway lanes against high speed traffic;
3) Substandard acceleration and deceleration lanes where access to the highway has
been provided;
4) Substandard trucking climbing lane in the eastbound direction.
Between 1989 and 1994, Caltrans reported 213 accidents, resulting in twelve fatalities and
181 injuries, occurring within the 4.7 mile segment of State Route 4 West. The fatality rate
for this period is 0.042 accidents per Million-Vehicle Miles, which is slightly higher than the
state wide average for similar facilities.2
TRAFFIC CONGESTION:
The traffic volumes on State Route 4 West routinely cause significant delays for mainline
traffic as well as vehicles accessing the highway from roads or driveways. Annual Average
Daily Traffic(AADT) capacity for a two-lane highway in level terrain with 11% truck traffic
is approximately 22,100 according to the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)
di�hway Capacity Manual. Within the project limits the 1990 AADT was determined to be
32,000 between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway. According to 1990 data this section of the
highway was operating at below Level of Service E. More recent data indicate that today
in 1997 the highway is nearing its capacity level.
It is noted that the ideal total two-way capacity for a two lane undivided highway is 2,800
2 Maior Investment Study:Route 4 Gap from I-80 to Cummings Skyway in Contra Costa County,
prepared by Mark Thomas&Co.for the Contra Costa Transportation Authority(March 10, 1995)
4
vehicles per hour. However, given the percentage of trucks, directional split, narrow
shoulders, reduced curve radii, and restricted sight distance, the theoretical two-way
capacity on the 4.7 mile segment of State Route 4 West is closer to 2,300 vehicles per
hour. Recent traffic counts recorded a total AM peak hour volume at 2,750 and speeds
at approximately 44 mph near the Franklin Canyon Golf Course. Traffic projections for
Year 2000 indicate an expected increase in traffic demand of up to 25%. Recent travel
demand modeling predicts that AADT in the Year 2000 for this segment of highway will
reach 39,000 (roughly 75% higher than theoretical capacity) and total two way peak hour
volume will increase to 3,560 vehicles per hour(55% higher than theoretical capacity). As
traffic demand increases, LOS will further degrade on the route significantly increasing
motorist delay, if additional highway lane capacity in both directions is not provided.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project would construct a full four-lane freeway
facility between 1-80 and the Cummings Skyway Interchange and is currently estimated to
cost $112 million. The freeway project would be constructed on one of four alignment
options, now being studied in an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact
Report (EIS/EIR), that generally run 100 to 400 feet north of the existing highway. The
project is planned to be constructed in two main phases:
Phase I - Constructing a Fully Divided Four-Lane Highway. This initial phase would
construct two new lanes north of the existing roadway (along the ultimate freeway
alignment). In conjunction with the existing two lane roadway, Phase / would provide a
four-lane fully divided facility through the corridor and would include only one full
movement at-grade intersection which may or many not warrant a signal. From 1-80 to
Sycamore Avenue an additional lane would be constructed in each direction resulting in
a four-lane facility. Between Sycamore Avenue and Loprest/Asbury driveway, two
additional lanes would be constructed immediately north of the existing roadway. An
overcrossing would be constructed near the Unocal Carbon plant to eliminate need for an
at-grade intersection in this area. The new roadway lanes would then transition northerly
between the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) tracks and the Yellow Freight
Systems and Burton Machine sites, climbing to cross over BNSF rail tracks north of
Christie Underpass and would then conform back to the existing highway alignment just
west of Cummings Skyway. Eastbound lanes would utilize the existing highway and
westbound traffic would use the two newly constructed lanes. See FIGURE 2 for a
schematic diagram of these improvements. The total cost for Phase 1 improvements is
estimated at $65 million.
Phase 11 - Completing the Freeway. The second phase would construct two additional
lanes along the same alignment immediately north of the lanes constructed in Phase I,
resulting in a four-lane freeway facility between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway Interchange.
5
Once this phase is completed, the existing roadway would then be converted to a
continuous two way south side frontage road, providing local access from Hercules to
Cummings Skyway Interchange. Phase 11 is estimated to cost $47 million. See FIGURE
3 for a schematic diagram of Phase 11 improvements.
PROJECT SCHEDULE AND STAGING
The Contra Costa Transportation Authority is currently preparing an EIS/EIR for the
project. It is anticipated that the draft EIS/EIR will be released for public review and
comment during Spring 1997 and certified by Fall 1997. Contingent upon securing funds,
the project's design activities could begin as early as Summer 1997 and be ready for
construction by mid-1999. Due to the uncertainty in the level and timing of funding for this
project, Phase I construction could be divided into several stages.
6
FIGUBE2
SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE 1
ROM 4 FREEWAY GAP PROJECT
PHASE 1
Stege 1 Stage 2 S1Uge 3
PG&E TM OMI"I"
Tov»r11M
cMr� vhrvrllM lvlw vEl) r
worm««"`.Inc
a«Povr+r•mar
m
r �� .lr4rry OVrf� FIJI
CM ffftluxl* r 1�
wewmrnt g
rl-p.arMMwsrtMen
.. a
vrrrrw c.r«
la
colt«M
......... rarnn.lmaa ►W" "'� wun
[.0
rrrrrr wrrrrmM
CONTRA COSTA
MANSPOR M r/ONAUrBOR/rY
dwrr rdalrq fig! v
MARK TXOM"&CO.IMC.
"N0 ""°"�°"•"""'""""�" Attachment A
3-10-97
7
FIGURE-3
SR-4 WEST FWY. GAP CLOSURE PROJECT, PHASE H
ROUTE 4 FREEWAY GAP PROJECT
PHASE 2
,,--PG6Elulon
Towe"rr li Iim
i
U.1
1� Rwwy C.0111p�0a00 '�
® A, , M ge
Gnphk' ~RR H .
LLJRU,4]
m
yp'.j.' Us"ROYb I WtraaTrFT RandP rwd FIOIIWV m.a
F..H C." OF F��RRGMfCwnt COSTA
ON AUTHORITYRK THOM"i CO.INC.
cm a9/0F®ra a ne+cn FtA1a61f
Attachment B
3-10-97
8
FEE PROGRAM AREA BOUNDARY
The fee area will include the unincorporated areas of western Contra Costa County,
including those areas adjacent to the communities of Crockett, Rodeo, North Richmond,
East Richmond Heights, and EI Sobrante.
It is anticipated that the cities of Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, and EI Cerrito
will form similar fee areas within their incorporated areas.
FIGURE 4 shows the general location of the Fee Area in western Contra Costa County.
A legal description of the fee area is attached as EXHIBIT "A."
PURPOSE OF THE FEE PROGRAM
The purpose of this program is to generate funds, through the adoption of a dedicated fee
on development for subregional traffic mitigation, that will support and augment funding
for the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. The State Route 4 West Gap Closure
Project will improve safety and route continuity to a substandard highway, provide
additional capacity, and help to reduce congestion on this and other nearby roads. By
adoption of this fee, the transportation system can keep pace with the planned growth in
the area by meeting the region's transportation needs and improving transportation
infrastructure contained in the circulation elements for the General Plans of Hercules and
Contra Costa County and also in the Contra Costa Transportation Authority's Countywide
Comprehensive Transportation Plan. The funds collected may also be used as the local
match required to obtain State and/or Federal funds for the State Route 4 West Gap
Closure Project.
USE OF THE FEES
The proposed fees will be used to augment other funding sources, including Measure C
Sales Tax funds and State and Federal transportation funds, for the State Route 4 West
Gap Closure Project. The fees collected will be used for project development activities,
including planning and design studies, preparation of environmental reports, acquisition
of right of way, and construction of the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. The fees
may be used to reimburse agencies who advance funds for the project from other funding
sources. These fees will also pay for some administrative expenses incurred in developing
and administering the fee program.
9
FIGURE 4
MAP OF BOUNDARY
PROPOSED
WEST CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE PROGRAM
Suisun Bay a Mars
San Pablo Bay
i
0 wCC t;
V.2Fee Area
Marin`�� Contra Costa County
,r� ` Oakland �M�OA COU
i San � `''�,� P
i Franclscoy>
10
The proposed fees will support improvements to the State Route 4 West Gap Closure
Project to meet the minimum traffic level of service requirements and safety demands
for the 4.7 mile section of highway. The project will be constructed to Caltrans highway
design standards.
Improvements to this section of State Route 4 West will be constructed in usable
segments as funds become available.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN USE OF FEES AND TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT
The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project is necessary for safety and to improve the
capacity of the road network serving the West County area as determined by planned
growth depicted in the General Plans for Contra Costa County, Hercules, Pinole, San
Pablo, Richmond and EI Cerrito. The road network outlined in these documents depicts
State Route 4 West as a major transportation corridor.
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 UTE). Trin Generation Manual_ 5th Edition and
results of the West County Traffic Model. As a result, the proposed fees are directly
related to traffic generated by each particular land use category with non-residential trip
generation factors significantly reduced from the standard values in the ITE manual.
GENERAL PLAN RELATIONSHIP
The Circulation Element for the Contra Costa County General Plan depicts State Route
4 West as a four-lane divided highway. The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project
will, therefore, meet an objective of the Contra Costa County General Plan's Circulation
Element by constructing a divided four lane facility on the 4.7 mile segment of State
Route 4 West between 1-80 and Cummings Skyway.
DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
The development potential for the West County fee program area was estimated using
the Association of Bay Area Governments' Projections 94 forecast which projected
growth to the year 2010 for the cities of Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, and EI
Cerrito and Contra Costa County. The State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project will be
partially funded by development mitigation fees uniformly assessed over the entire
West County region per dwelling unit or per square foot of gross floor area. For
11
example, the fee assessed to a new single family home would be the same whether it
was located in Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond, EI Cerrito or in an
unincorporated community in the West County area. A summary of the estimated
development potential for the fee area is shown in TABLE 1: ABAG Forecast of West
County Projected Population and TABLE 2: ABAG Forecast of West County
Employment (1997-2010).
TABLE 1
ABAG Forecast of West County Projected Population (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
EI Cerrito 30,004 31,500 1,496 5.9% 5.0%
Hercules 19,390 29,500 7,410 29.0% 38.2%
Pinole 27,742 29,500 1,758 6.9% 6.3%
Richmond 109,298 122,200 12,902 50.5% 11.8%
San Pablo 29,734 30,800 1,066 4.2% 3.6%
Rodeo-Crockett 12,148 13,100 952 3.7% 7.8%
EI Sobrante*
TOTAL West County 228,903 254,473 1 25,570 1 100.0°/,J 11.2%
Growth in EI Sobrante is included in the Richmond area
TABLE 2
ABAG Forecast of West County Projected Employment (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction Retail Office Industrial Total Share Growth
EI Cerrito 28 326 -32 322 1.6% 4.4%
Hercules 642 968 1,076 2,686 13.5% 78.7%
Pinole 342 326 172 840 4.2% 15.0%
Richmond 1,318 7,288 6,564 15,170 76.3% 38.9%
San Pablo 34 496 82 612 3.1% 8.7%
Rodeo-Crockett 70 142 28 240 1.2% 10.5%
EI Sobrante
TOTAL West County 2,434 9,546 1 7,890 19,870 100.0% 1 30.70%
* Growth in EI Sobrante is included in the Richmond area
12
BASIS FOR FEE APPORTIONMENT
The portion of the cost of the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project to be funded by
this fee program has been distributed between the individual land use categories based
on daily a.m. peak hour trip generation. TABLE 3 presents the total growth in a.m.
peak hour traffic by jurisdiction, assuming that Phase 1, State Route 4 West Gap
Closure Project is completed by Year 2010.
TABLE 3
A.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes (1997-2010)
Jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
EI Cerrito 10,481 11,268 787 6.1% 7.5%
Hercules 9,536 13,315 3,779 29.2% 39.6%
Pinole 8,976 10,229 1,253 9.7% 14.0%
Richmond 29,620 34,726 5,106 39.4% 17.2%
San Pablo 10,605 12,291 1,686 13.0% 15.9%
Rodeo-Crockett 3,587 3,940 354 2.7% 9.9%
EI Sobrante 221 214
TOTAL West County 73 026 85.983 12,957 100% 17.7016
"Growth in EI Sobrante is included in the Richmond area
13
CALCULATION OF FEE Sr„ EDULE
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 4.
TABLE 4
PROPOSED FEE PROGRAM RATES
LAND USE CATEGORY FEE RATE
Single Family Residential $700/dwelling unit
Multi-Family Residential $560/dwelling unit
Retail Commercial $0.20/square foot
Office $0.20/square foot
Industrial $0.20/square foot
Other $150.00/peak hour trip
A development mitigation fee appears to be a viable revenue source at this time to
augment funding for the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project because of the
significant demand on transportation funds to improve road and transportation
infrastructure throughout the Bay Area and the entire State. The above estimates
include construction, right of way, environmental documentation, planning, engineering,
administration, and contingencies.
The cost of the project would be uniformly distributed per each dwelling unit or each
square foot of gross floor area of building space throughout the entire West County
area.
FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PROJECT
This fee program will provide a funding commitment toward Phase /of State Route 4
West Gap Closure Project. Based on ABAG growth projections to the year 2010, the
cumulative fee revenues received from each participating jurisdiction in West County
will contribute funding for about 6% of the $65 million needed for the State Route 4
West Gap Closure Project, Phase 1, or, approximately $ 4.1 million (See TABLE 5).
14
TABLE-5
FEE PROGRAM CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PROJECT
PROJECT FEE PROGRAM MEASURE OTHER TOTAL
DESCRIPTION CONTRIBUTION C FUNDING COST
SALES SOURCES ESTIMATE
TAX
Phase 1, SR-4 West Fwy $ 4.1 Mil. $ 40.1 Mil. to be $ 65 Mil.
Gap Closure Project determined
Phase ll, SR-4 West n/a n/a n/a $ 47 Mil.
F,wy. Gap Closure
Project
$112
Million
TRANSFER OF FEE PROGRAM REVENUE TO LEAD AGENCY
Contra Costa County, and the cities of Hercules, Pinole, San Pablo, Richmond and EI
Cerrito, will jointly enter into a Master Cooperative Agreement with the Contra Costa
Transportation Authority to serve as the serve as the lead or sponsoring agency for
financial administration, environmental clearance, planning, design, and construction of
the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. This Master Cooperative Agreement will
establish procedures for transferring fee program revenue from each participating
jurisdiction to the Contra Costa Transportation Authority.
It is anticipated that fee revenues will be transferred by Contra Costa County to the
Contra Costa Transportation Authority on a quarterly basis, with a brief Ouarterly
Report which includes a description of fee revenue collected and any credits against
the fee granted by Contra Costa County and less any administrative expenses incurred
by Contra Costa County. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority will deposit the fee
revenue into an interest-bearing account to be used solely for activities in support of the
State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project.
15
ANNUAL REVIEW OF FEES
Project cost estimates will be reviewed annually by analyzing the previous year's
change in the California Construction Cost index 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 upon issuance of building permits, in accordance with Section
913-4.204 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. 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 the planning, environmental documentation, design, acquisition of
right of way, and construction of the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project and for
the purpose of fee program administration.
IN LIEU DEDICATION
A development may be required to construct, or dedicate right of way for, a portion of
the State Route 4 West Gap Closure Project. In such a case the developer may be
eligible to receive credit against the fee.
PR
amp61\wdee.rpt
16
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF FEE PROGRAM AREA
17
A -
WCCTAC Boundary
Legal Description
EXHIBIT "A"
Real property in Contra Costa County, California described as follows:
Beginning at the most south easterly comer of the 18.04 acre parcel of land shown on the Record
of Survey filed December 22, 1931 in Book 2 of Licensed Surveyor Maps at page 5; thence from
said Point of Beginning south 66011'00"west 125.15 feet to the northeasterly line of the Southern
Pacific Railroad right of way; thence southerly to the southwesterly line of said railroad right of way
to an 1/2" iron pipe and tags L.S. 3489 as shown on the Record of Survey filed April 10, 1990 in
Book 93 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 32; thence south 43026'43"west 341 feet more or
less to the westerly right of way line of Carquinez Scenic Drive (formerly Pomona Avenue); thence
along said right of way line in a general southerly direction 555 feet more or less to the easterly
boundary of the parcel of land granted to Hook Recorded December 19, 1993 in Book 18288 of
Official Records at page 889; thence along said boundary in a general southerly and southeasterly
direction 1771 feet more or less to the southeasterly comer of said Hook parcel (18288 OR 889);
thence along the south line of said parcel and its westerly prolongation,west 4050 feet more or less
to the easterly right of way line of McEwen Road; thence westerly 50 feet more or less to the
westerly right of way line;thence continuing westerly 4250 feet more or less to the northwest comer
of the parcel of land granted to Brenkle Enterprises recorded December 13, 1990 in Book 16298
of Official Records at page 223; said point is on the easterly right of way line of Cummings Skyway;
thence along said easterly right of way, southerly and southeasterly 3301 feet more or less to the
northerly right of way line of the John Muir Parkway (Highway 4); thence in a general southerly
direction 1070 feet more or less to the northerly boundary of the parcel of land shown on the
Record of Survey lot line Adjustment 64-88 filed February 15, 1989 in Book 90 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 16; thence along said northerly line and its northwesterly prolongation
north 78031'05"west 800 feet more or less to the southeasterly right of way line of Franklin Canyon
Road; thence along said right of way line in a southwesterly direction 5200 feet to the westerly
corner of parcel "B" as shown on the Minor Subdivision MS 98-70 filed October 9, 1970 in Book 14
of Parcel Maps at page 24, said point is on the easterly right of way line of the Atchison Topeka
and Santa Fe Railroad right of way; thence southwesterly to the westerly right of way line of said
railroad;thence along said westerly right of way line in a general southerly direction 5400 feet more
or less; thence leaving said westerly right of way line south 450east 2300 feet; thence along the
westerly boundary of the 137.40 acre and 98.59 acre parcels south 0020'20" east 2621.20 feet to
the southwest corner of the 98.59 acre parcel as shown on the Record of Survey filed May 29,
1953 in Book 15 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 44; thence along the southerly boundary
(15 LSM 44) line south 87050'20" east 2680.05 feet to the southeasterly corner of said 98.59 acre
parcel (15 LSM 44); thence along the west boundary Part F Rancho EI Pinole south 0054" west
1837 feet as shown on the Record of Survey filed October 20, 1937 in Book 4 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 26; thence continuing southerly along said west boundary 1600 feet more
or less to point PR 26 on the boundary of that parcel of land granted to Soehngen recorded
February 22, 1980 in Book 9741 of Official Records at page 584; thence along said boundary
easterly 600 feet to the westerly right of way line of Ferndale Road; thence along said right of way
1
line southeasterly 1150 feet more or less to the northeasterly boundary of Parcel "A" of minor
subdivision MS 81-78 filed July 11, 1979 in Book 78 of Parcel Maps at page 45; thence south
75058'05"west 1071.26 feet; thence south 30019"west 282.28 feet; thence south 24021'06" east
1165.5 feet to the southwesterly corner of Parcel B (78 PM 45); thence leaving Parcel B (78 PM
45) southwesterly 6687.79 feet along the general southeasterly boundary of Parcel B to its most
southerly comer as shown on minor subdivision MS 8-87 filed June 25, 1993 in Book 162 of Parcel
Maps at page 25; thence southwesterly 1719.2 feet more or less along the northwesterly boundary
of Parcel "A"to the most westerly comer of parcel A as shown on minor subdivision MS 18-91 filed
December 29, 1992 in Book 160 of Parcel Maps at page 33; thence along the boundary of minor
subdivision MS 244-77 filed September 11, 1979 in Book 80 of Parcel Maps at page 35 the
following courses (1) south 1°26'29"west 1058.16 feet, (2) south 87018'30"west 2133.27 feet (3)
north 89°21'12"west 4888 feet more or less to the southwesterly corner of Parcel "A" (80 PM 35);
thence southerly, southwesterly, southeasterly 10454 feet more or less along the boundary of Tract
No. 27 as shown on the map of the Rancho EI Sobrante to the most easterly point of Tract No. 26
(Rancho EI Sobrante); thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Tract No. 26 and
its southwesterly prolongation to the northeasterly right of way line of San Pablo Dam Road;thence
southeasterly along said right of way line to the southeasterly boundary of Specific Tract D (Rancho
EI Sobrante); thence south 47°50' west to the southerly corner of said Specific Tract D; thence
along the southwest boundary line of Specific Tract D north 42039' west 2253.9 feet and north
30°00'west 1511.4 feet more or less to the northerly comer of Lot 62 (Rancho El Sobrante); thence
south 44°58' west along the northwesterly line of said Lot 62 to the Alameda/Contra Costa County
boundary line; thence along the Contra Costa County boundary line in a general westerly,
northwesterly, northerly, northeasterly and easterly direction to a point on the County boundary line
which is perpendicular to the Point of Beginning; thence along said perpendicular line to the Point
Of Beginning.
RZ:jlg
g Acledcal\exh ibits\RS Lotl i n.t3
April 1, 1997
2
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
(Adoption of West Contra Costa Subregional
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 West Contra Costa Subregion]
Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit.
SECTION H. AUTHORITY. This ordinance is enacted, in part, pursuant to Government
Code Sections 66484 and Division 913, Title 9, of the Contra Costa County 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 West
Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee 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:
West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fees:
Land Use Tyne Fee Amount
Single family residential. $700 per dwelling unit
Individual units and duet homes
with one shared wall, and
residential condominiums.
Multiple family residential $560 per dwelling unit
Commercial, office, industrial, retail $0.20 per square foot of gross floor area
Other uses not identified above $150 per trip generated
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
The fees shall be payable at the time of issuance of a building permit, 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. Hercules-Rodeo-Crockett Area of Benefit
2. Richmond-El Sobrante Area of Benefit
3. North Richmond Area of Benefit
4. West County Area of Benefit
In addition, the following shall be exempt from the fees levied under this ordinance: (1) projects
for which a vesting tentative map have been approved as of the effective date of this ordinance;
and (2) projects covered by an existing development agreement which expressly excludes
collection of any additional fees.
The fee for uses not listed above shall be determined by the County through information generated
by appropriate traffic studies, conducted according to the methodology developed and approved
by the WCCTAC Technical Advisory Committee, with concurrence of the WCCTAC.
A project that replaces an existing structure or development is subject to the fee only to the extent
that it would generate more peak hour vehicle trips than the existing development.
SECTION V. FEE CREDITS. A developer may request a further reduction in fees
through the County if the project would generate a lower number of trips than data provided by
the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and above and beyond the discounted fee rates
already built into the program. Such request shall be supported by appropriate traffic studies,
conducted according to the methodology developed and approved by the WCCTAC Technical
Advisory Committee, with concurrence of the WCCTAC.
A developer may receive credit against fees for the dedication of land for right-of-way
and/or construction of improvements for specific bridge and major thoroughfare improvements
described in the Development Program Report on file with the Clerk of the Board. The amount
of credit shall be determined by the County based on actual, documented expenses or an appraisal
prepared by a qualified appraiser acceptable to the County, and the credit shall be exclusive of the
dedications, setbacks, improvements, and/or other traffic mitigation measures which are a
condition of development approval.
-2-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
SECTION VI, FEE_ARF A. The fees set forth in this ordinance shall apply to all property
described in Exhibit A attached hereto.
SECTION VII. 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 West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee 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 West 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 VIII. 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 IX. 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.
SECTION X. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect 60 days after passage
but shall not become operative until the Community Development Department files a statement
with the Clerk of the Board certifying that similar fees have been adopted by the Cities of El
Cerrito, Hercules, Pinole, Richmond and San Pablo. Within 15 days of passage, this ordinance
shall be published once, with the names of the Supervisors voting for and against it, in the -
, a newspaper 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.
-3-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
PASSED and ADOPTED on 1997 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST: Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors and County
Administrator
By:
Deputy Board Chair
-l-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
EXHIBIT "A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
OF
WEST CONTRA COSTA SUB-REGIONAL
TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE AREA
-5-
ORDINANCE NO. 97 -
WCCTAC Boundary
Legal Description
EXHIBIT"A"
Real property in Contra Costa County, California described as follows:
Beginning at the most south easterly comer of the 18.04 acre parcel of land shown on the Record
of Survey filed December 22, 1931 in Book 2 of Licensed Surveyor Maps at page 5; thence from
said Point of Beginning south 66011'00"west 125.15 feet to the northeasterly line of the Southern
Pacific Railroad right of way; thence southerly to the southwesterly line of said railroad right of way
to an 1/2" iron pipe and tags L.S. 3489 as shown on the Record of Survey filed April 10, 1990 in
Book 93 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 32; thence south 43°2643"west 341 feet more or
less to the westerly right of way line of Carquinez Scenic Drive (formerly Pomona Avenue); thence
along said right of way line in a general southerly direction 555 feet more or less to the easterly
boundary of the parcel of land granted to Hook Recorded December 19, 1993 in Book 18288 of
Official Records at page 889; thence along said boundary in a general southerly and southeasterly
direction 1771 feet more or less to the southeasterly comer of said Hook parcel (18288 OR 889);
thence along the south line of said parcel and its westerly prolongation,west 4050 feet more or less
to the easterly right of way line of McEwen Road; thence westerly 50 feet more or less to the
westerly right of way line;thence continuing westerly 4250 feet more or less to the northwest comer
of the parcel of land granted to Brenkle Enterprises recorded December 13, 1990 in Book 16298
of Official Records at page 223; said point is on the easterly right of way line of Cummings Skyway;
thence along said easterly right of way, southerly and southeasterly 3301 feet more or less to the
northerly right of way line of the John Muir Parkway (Highway 4); thence in a general southerly
direction 1070 feet more or less to the northerly boundary of the parcel of land shown on the
Record of Survey lot line Adjustment 64-88 filed February 15, 1989 in Book 90 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 16; thence along said northerly line and its northwesterly prolongation
north 78031'05"west 800 feet more or less to the southeasterly right of way line of Franklin Canyon
Road; thence along said right of way line in a southwesterly direction 5200 feet to the westerly
comer of parcel "B"as shown on the Minor Subdivision MS 98-70 filed October 9, 1970 in Book 14
of Parcel Maps at page 24, said point is on the easterly right of way line of the Atchison Topeka
and Santa Fe Railroad right of way; thence southwesterly to the westerly right of way line of said
railroad;thence along said westerly right of way line in a general southerly direction 5400 feet more
or less; thence leaving said westerly right of way line south 450east 2300 feet; thence along the
westerly boundary of the 137.40 acre and 98.59 acre parcels south 0°20'20" east 2621.20 feet to
the southwest comer of the 98.59 acre parcel as shown on the Record of Survey filed May 29,
1953 in Book 15 of Licensed Surveyors Maps at page 44; thence along the southerly boundary
(15 LSM 44) line south 87°50'20" east 2680.05 feet to the southeasterly comer of said 98.59 acre
parcel (15 LSM 44); thence along the west boundary Part F Rancho EI Pinole south 0054" west
1837 feet as shown on the Record of Survey filed October 20, 1937 in Book 4 of Licensed
Surveyors Maps at page 26; thence continuing southerly along said west boundary 1600 feet more
or less to point PR 26 on the boundary of that parcel of land granted to Soehngen recorded
February 22, 1980 in Book 9741 of Official Records at page 584; thence along said boundary
easterly 600 feet to the westerly right of way line of Femdale Road; thence along said right of way
1
line southeasterly 1150 feet more or less to the northeasterly boundary of Parcel "A' of minor
subdivision MS 81-78 filed July 11, 1979 in Book 78 of Parcel Maps at page 45; thence south
75058'05"west 1071.26 feet; thence south 30019"west 282.28 feet; thence south 24°21'06" east
1165.5 feet to the southwesterly comer of Parcel B (78 PM 45); thence leaving Parcel B (78 PM
45) southwesterly 6687.79 feet along the general southeasterly boundary of Parcel B to its most
southerly comer as shown on minor subdivision MS 8-87 filed June 25, 1993 in Book 162 of Parcel
Maps at page 25; thence southwesterly 1719.2 feet more or less along the northwesterly boundary
of Parcel"A"to the most westerly comer of parcel A as shown on minor subdivision MS 18-91 filed
December 29, 1992 in Book 160 of Parcel Maps at page 33; thence along the boundary of minor
subdivision MS 244-77 filed September 11, 1979 in Book 80 of Parcel Maps at page 35 the
following courses (1) south 102629"west 1058.16 feet, (2) south 87018'30"west 2133.27 feet (3)
north 89021'12"west 4888 feet more or less to the southwesterly comer of Parcel "A"(80 PM 35);
thence southerly,southwesterly,southeasterly 10454 feet more or less along the boundary of Tract
No. 27 as shown on the map of the Rancho EI Sobrante to the most easterly point of Tract No. 26
(Rancho El Sobrante); thence southwesterly along the southeasterly line of said Tract No. 26 and
its southwesterly prolongation to the northeasterly right of way line of San Pablo Dam Road;thence
southeasterly along said right of way line to the southeasterly boundary of Specific Tract D (Rancho
El Sobrante); thence south 47°50'west to the southerly comer of said Specific Tract D; thence
along the southwest boundary line of Specific Tract D north 42°39' west 2253.9 feet and north
30°00'west 1511.4 feet more or less to the northerly comer of Lot 62 (Rancho EI Sobrante);thence
south 4458' west along the northwesterly line of said Lot 62 to the Alameda/Contra Costa County
boundary line; thence along the Contra Costa County boundary line in a general westerly,
northwesterly, northerly, northeasterly and easterly direction to a point on the County boundary line
which is perpendicular to the Point of Beginning; thence along said perpendicular line to the Point
of Beginning.
RZ:jlg
g:tciericahexhibits\RSLo#iin.2
April 1, 1997
2
West Contra Costa County Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Program
Nexus Analysis
■ Introduction
The West Contra Costa Transportation Advisory Committee (WCCTAC) is in the process
of establishing a Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program (STMP) in response to
Contra Costa County's Measure C— the 1/2 cent sales tax measure for transportation
programs and projects passed in 1988. Measure C requires that a program of regional
traffic mitigation fees, assessments, or other mitigations be developed to fund regional
and subregional transportation projects. The STMP fee will be charged on new
development to augment other funding for the Highway 4 West project and two transit
_ projects. The purpose of this report is to document the technical analysis necessary for the
implementation of the STMP fee.
■ Methodology
An area-wide fee program must conform to the requirements of Government Code 66000
et seq. and subsequent opinions issued by the U.S. Supreme Court, California Supreme
Court, and lower courts. While the statutes and court decisions provide general
guidelines, the design and implementation of multi-jurisdictional impact fees is not as
tightly circumscribed as other local revenue measures (e.g., assessment districts, local
sales tax measures, subdivision map/developer exactions). Nevertheless, the statutory
requirements and judicial guidance allowed WCCTAC to follow a basic five step process
to design its regional fee:
1. Project the Amount of New Development. ABAG's Projections 94 provides the
forecast of new residents and employees moving into West County over the next 20
years. The nexus analysis and fee calculations depend on converting this projection of
residential and employment growth in each jurisdiction to a 13 year increment of new
trip generation (1997 to 2010). The net increment of new trips, however, must be
reduced by the trips from exempt development. Exempt development has already
received a vesting tentative map or has a development agreement excluding
_ assessment of additional fees.
2. Specify the Transportation Improvements Needed to Accommodate Growth. The
law allows WCCTAC to require new development to mitigate its full impact on the
West County routes of regional significance [i.e., maintain current levels of service
(LOS)]. The WCCTAC, however,has limited the maximum costs to new development
to approximately $24.5 million, the unfunded portion of eight projects. This is
substantially below the threshold of new development's full responsibility.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 1
3. Evaluate the Relationship Between the Improvements, the Share of Funding from
New Development, and the Impact of New Trip Generation. The improvements
must provide benefits that are in reasonable proportion to the amount of the impact
fees paid by new development. WCCTAC has chosen to impose a uniform fee
because it has reached a consensus that new development in all parts of the West
County area will receive roughly proportional benefits from the improvements.
_ 4. Allocate Costs Across Land Use Types. Fee amounts should be fairly distributed
among residential, retail, office, and industrial development. This distribution is
based on the trip generation characteristics of each land use type.
5. Prepare Fee Schedules and Implementation Ordinances. Each local jurisdiction,
through their exercise of their police power, must adopt an ordinance imposing the
fee on development within their jurisdiction.
The remainder of this report explains the calculations and presents the results of each of
the five steps described above. Supporting documentation regarding transportation
analyses and computer modeling is available from WCCTAC.
■ New Development and Incremental Trip Generation
From 1997 through 2010, new development in the West Contra Costa County area will
generate 12,957 additional a.m. peak hour trips on the area's routes of regional
significance, an increase of almost 18 percent over the next 13 years.
Population, Employment, and Land Use Growth
The STMP assumes the population and employment growth forecast presented in the
ABAG 1994 Projections 94 for West Contra Costa County. The figures for 1997, the initial
year for STMP implementation, are estimated by straight line interpolation between the
years 1990 and 2000. Table 1 presents the population and employment projections.
Table 1. ABAG Forecast of West Contra Costa County Population (1997-2010)
jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
El Cerrito 30,004 31,500 1,496 5.9% 5.0%
Hercules 19,390 26,800 7,410 29.0% 38.2%
Pinole 27,742 29,500 1,758 6.9% 6.3%
Richmond 109,298 122,200 12,902 50.5% 11.8%
San Pablo 29,734 30,800 1,066 4.2% 3.6%
Rodeo-Crockett 12,148 13,100 952 3.7% 7.8%
EI Sobrante 587 573 (14) -0.1% -2.4%
Total WCCC 228,903 254,473 25,570 100.0% 11.2%
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 2
As shown in Table 1, residential development in Richmond will accommodate over half
of the area's population growth. Hercules, the area's fastest growing jurisdiction, will
account for 29 percent of the area's new residents. The remaining jurisdictions will
account for between four and seven percent.
Table 2 shows that office employment in Richmond is projected to grow the most of the
three categories of employment across all seven jurisdictions. Total employment for the
region is expected to increase by over 30 percent, with the total jobs in the City of
Hercules increasing by almost 79 percent.
Table 2. ABAG Forecast of West Contra Costa County Employment (1997 to 2010)
Retail Office Industrial Total Share Growth
El Cerrito 28 326 (32) 322 1.6/0 4.4%
Hercules 642 968 1,076 2,686 13.5% 78.7%
_ Pinole 342 326 172 840 4.2% 15.0%
Richmond 1,318 7,288 6,564 15,170 76.3% 38.9%
San Pablo 34 496 82 612 3.1% 8.7%
Rodeo-Crockett 70 142 28 240 1.2% 10.5%
- El Sobrante 0 0 0 0 0.0% 0%
Total WCCC 2,434 9,546 7,890 19,870 100.0% 30.7%
Population and employment growth will generate and attract new trips on the area's
regional roadways. The socioeconomic projections shown in Tables 1 and 2 are used in a
transportation demand forecasting model developed specifically for the WCCC area to
forecast the increase in travel. The results of the modeling are shown in Table 3.
Trip Generation
Table 3 presents the a.m. peak hour traffic volumes for the year 2010, assuming the
interim project on Highway 4 is constructed by the year 2010. It shows that new
development will increase a.m. peak hour trip volumes over 17 percent during the next 13
years. Almost 40 percent of this increase will come from the City and sphere of Richmond
and another 30 percent will come from Hercules.
Table 3. AM Peak Hour Volumes From 1997 to 2010
jurisdiction 1997 2010 Increment Share Growth
El Cerrito 10,481 11,268 787 6.1% 7.5%
Hercules 9,536 13,315 3,779 29.2% 39.6%
Pinole 8,976 10,229 1,253 9.7% 14.0%
Richmond 29,620 34,726 5,106 39.4% 17.2%
San Pablo 10,605 12,291 1,686 13.0% 15.9%
Rodeo-Crockett 3,587 3,940 354 2.7% 9.9%
El Sobrante 221 214 -7 -0.1% -3.3%
Total WCCC 73,026 85,983 12,957 100.0% 17.7%
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 3
The total increment of 12,957 new trips encompasses all trips that either originate or
terminate in the West County area. In addition, roughly 3,000 new through trips
(external— external) will use some part of the West County regional system. The impact
of these new trips will be mitigated from state and federally-funded projects.
Exempt Development
The total increment of new trip generation (from 1997 to 2010) includes trips from new
development that will be exempt from paying a STMP fee. Their exemption is due to
either one of two legal criteria applying to a development project that has (1) been issued
a vested tentative map or (2) completed a development agreement that explicitly excludes
assessment of any additional fees. If either of these criteria apply to the development
project as of the official date the jurisdiction's council or board adopts the STMP, the
developer may pull the proscribed number of building permits without paying a fee.
While the transportation impacts of exempt development will be as real as non-exempt,
WCCTAC cannot impose a STMP fee and therefore cannot collect fee revenues for the
proposed projects. Thus, we must subtract the number of new trips generated by exempt
development from the toll increment of new trips. The results is the new amount of new
trips over which we can allocate the unfunded costs of the selected improvements.
We calculate the number of trips generated by exempt development by specifying the
exempt development project's specific type(s) of land use and converting these into trips.
A vested project with twenty dwelling units of single family residential, for example,
would generate 0.74 a.m. peak hour trips per unit or a total of 14.8 peak hour trips.
Table 4. Estimates of Exempt Development By jurisdiction (1997-2010)
Residential Non-Residential
Dwelling Unit Retail Sq.Ft. Office S+Ft. Total
El Cerrito 60,000 60,000
Hercules 42,000 42,000
Pinole
— Richmond 928,000 928,000
San Pablo 45
Rodeo-Crockett 100
ElSobrante 104
Total WCCC 249 60,000 970,000 1,030,000
As shown in Table 4, exempt development in the WCCC area amounts to 249 single
_ family dwelling units and slightly more than one million square feet of retail and office
space. None of the jurisdictions identified exempt industrial development.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 4
The appropriate ITE trip generation rates are applied to the exempt development in order
to estimate the number of new trips that must be deducted from the total increment.' The
total number of trips from exempt residential development equals 148 a.m. peak trips.
Non-residential development will generate 1,220 a.m. peak trips, producing 1,368 total
trips that must be deducted from the total increment of 12,957 new trips. The net number
of new trips that may be assigned a share of the cost of improvements equals 11,589.
■ Transportation Improvements
The WCCTAC has evaluated the impact of new development on its subregional system
and identified numerous improvements. These improvements— if all were completed by
the year 2010—would minimize the worst of the congestion caused by the next 13 years of
growth within the area. While the WCCTAC could require new development to mitigate
all of the congestion it causes, cost of these improvements exceeds the amount of funding
private development could support.
WCCTAC, therefore, has selected the highest priority projects for inclusion in the STMP.
The cost of these improvements, shown in Table 5, includes over 54 percent of the total
funding from other public sources.
Table 5. STMP Projects and Available Funding
Available Unfunded
Project Total Cost Funding Amount
Route 4 Gap Project Near Hercules-Upgrade Conventional $48,000,000 $29,000,000 $19,000,000
Hwy.
EI Cerrito BART Station Parking Structure $6,000,000 $4,543,000 $1,457,000
Richmond Intermodal BART Station Improvements $7,000,000 $5,500,000 $1,500,000
San Pablo Avenue Corridor or AC Transit $2,000,000 $2,000,000
WCCC Pathfinder Sign Program $214,500 $214,500
EBRP District I Bay Trail Crockett Section $123,000 $48,000 $75,000
EBRP District 2 Bay Trail Pinole Section $850,000 $750,000 $100,000
Pinole/Hercules Bay Trail Connector $80,000 $80,000
Total STMP $64,267,500 $39,841,000 $24,426,500
'The ITE trip generation rates are shown in Table 7.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 5
The unfunded portion of the STMP's total $64.3 million cost equals roughly $24.5 (1997
dollars), or about 38 percent. In addition to the eight STMP projects shown above, West
County will receive an additional $94 million worth of improvements on regional routes.'
This brings the total cost of regional improvements to roughly $158 million from 1997 to
2010.
Credit for SMTP Land Dedications and Improvements
If in the future local efforts directly overlap with the STMP projects, some form of credit
may be given to development subject to the regional fee. The WCCTAC, however, will
exercise some level of discretion over the definition of overlap. For example, most WCCC
jurisdictions require development abutting a regional route to dedicate 120 feet of right-
of-way for the route's future widening; thus, such a dedication would not be eligible for
credit. Dedications in excess of this width, however, could receive a dollar-for-dollar
credit.
A developer may also request a further reduction in fees through the governing
jurisdiction if it is the opinion of the developer that the project may generate a lower
number of trips than data provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE).
The fee reduction would be based upon a traffic study. The methodology for conducting
the study shall be approved by the WCCTAC upon recommendation of the
WCCTAC-TAC.
■ Nexus Analysis
— The impact of new WCCC development on regional transportation facilities is based on
an update of the WCCC Traffic Model completed by Dowling Associates, Inc. This
computer model simulates current and future traffic flows on the roadway network under
a wide range of user-specified conditions. The model is extremely useful for determining
the impact of new development on roadway levels-of-service. In particular, the model
estimates new development's fair share of the selected regional improvements by
isolating the effects of new development from those of existing development, through
(external-external) trips, and existing deficiencies. This analysis indicated that new
development will cause levels-of-service to decline despite all of the improvements
proposed in MTC's short and long range improvement plan.
As part of its STMP, the WCCTAC has evaluated the impact of new development on its
subregional system given numerous improvements programmed in the RTP. These
improvements- if all were completed by the year 2010-will increase the area's capacity
for vehicle miles of travel (VMT) by 9.4 percent. New development will increase the
number of VMT by 26 percent, thus absorbing all of the new capacity plus the capacity
freed up by a 4 percent reduction in through trips (i.e., commuters traveling through
WCCC but not stopping). Thus, the net increase in total will be 57,814 VMT. Table 6
presents the results of the VMT analysis in more detail.
2The$94 million worth of projects is composed of HOV lanes from Carquinez to Route 4 $85 million
and$9 million worth of improvements to I-80 interchanges and parallel arterials.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 6
Table 6. VMT Analysis (1997-2010)
1997 2010 Increment Change
Total VMT 309,356 367,170 57,814 18.7%
VMT for Through Trips 72,529 69,941 (2,588) (3.6)%
Internal VMT 236,827 297,229 60,402 25.5%
VMT Capacity 577,166 631,207 54,041 9.4%
The results shown in Table 6 would justify the WCCTAC allocating 100 percent of the
STMP's total cost-roughly $64.3 million-to new development in WCCC. Fortunately,
WCCC has secured $39.8 million (or 62 percent of the total) from other sources, leaving
only $24.5 million still unfunded.
■ Fee Calculations
Fee calculations involve four steps:
Step 1 - Allocation of Costs-Determine if the total share of unfunded costs should be
allocated uniformly to all new development in the West County area, regardless of
jurisdiction,or if fees must be determined on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis.
• Step 2- Cost per Peak Hour Trip End- Calculate the cost per trip and fee schedule
based upon generating sufficient revenues to fund the $24.5 million for the STMP
Projects.
• Step 3-Preliminary Fee Schedules-Apply the cost per peak hour trip end to the trip
- generation characteristics of different types of land use to create a preliminary fee
schedule.
• Step 4- Final Fee Schedule- As an alternative to the fee schedules in Step 3, create
discounted fee schedules which reduce the financial burden placed on new
development by collecting less than the full,unfunded amount.
Allocation of Costs
The total cost of the STMP improvements should be roughly balanced with the benefits
each jurisdiction receives (or impacts it causes). This balance, however, is difficult to
quantify given the complexity of travel patterns in West County and the lack of
quantitative information of transit ridership. As an alternative to a quantitative analysis,
WCCTAC has decided the STMP projects represent a reasonable balance of benefits to all
jurisdictions. Given the extensive experience of the WCCTAC membership, this
qualitative approach is a satisfactory alternative to a qualitative analysis using the
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 7
transportation model (i.e., select-link analysis of all proposed projects'). Thus, WCCTAC
has decided to apply a uniform cost per peak hour tip end across all jurisdictions.
Costs Per Peak Hour Trip End
Impact fees for West County are calculated by dividing the number of new a.m. peak
hour trip ends by the unfunded cost of STMP projects. This calculation provides a
uniform cost per peak hour trip end. The net increase of 11,587 new a.m. peak hour trip
ends by the$24.5 million all STMP projects equals about$2,100 per peak hour trip end.
Preliminary Fee Schedule
The fee amounts are determined by multiplying the cost per a.m. peak hour trip end by
the number of a.m. trips generated by a particular land use. For purposes of efficiency
and consistency, WCCTAC has limited its fee schedule to two types of residential
development (i.e., single and multi-family dwelling units) and four types of commercial
space (large and small retail, office, and industrial). Table 7 shows the trip generation
rates for each land use. In addition, it shows the adjustments for average trip length, trip
diversion, and the final adjusted trip length.
Table 7. A.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Rates and Adjustments
Base Rates Trip Diversion Trip Length Final Peak Hour
Land Use Categories Adjustment Adjustment Adjustment Trips Rates
Single Family Residential 0.74 1.00 1.00 0.74
Multi Family Residential 0.47 1.00 1.00 0.47
Retail per 1,000 sq. ft. (<200 ksf) 1.60 0.20 0.50 0.16
Retail per 1,000 sq. ft. (>220 ksf) 0.80 0.45 0.50 0.18
Office per 1,000 sq.ft. 1.33 1.00 1.00 1.33
Industrial per 1,000 sq. ft. 0.90 1.00 1.00 0.90
Trip diversion factors indicate the percentage of trips for each land use category that are
part of a longer trip but divert less than two miles out of the way to stop at the land use.
Trip length adjusts for trip shorter than the home-based work trips. The rates shown in
Table 7 are multiplied by the cost per peak hour trip end to produce the preliminary fee
schedule shown below. The bottom row shows the estimated amount of revenue that the
fee schedule should collect over the next 13 years.
'For each segment of regional roadway that will be improved using fee revenues, select link analysis
shows the origins and destinations of future trips. Thus, the results help allocate the benefit of the
improved roadway according to the amount of new development in each jurisdiction.
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 8
Table 8. Preliminary Fee Schedule (1997- 2010)
Land Use Categories Full Funding for STMP Project
Single Family Residential $2,345
Multi Family Residential $1,002
Small Retail per square foot(<200,000 sq.ft.) $1.37
Large Retail per square foot(>220,000 sq.ft.) $1.68
Office per square foot $2.88
Industrial per square foot. $1.92
Total Revenues ($1,000,000) $24.5
Alternative Fee Schedule
While WCCTAC may be legally entitled to levy any of the preliminary fees shown in
Table 8, there are several compelling reasons for levying a lower fee on commercial
development. West County currently has a surplus of residents and a shortage of jobs (a
jobs/housing imbalance) and intends to encourage more commercial growth to improve
the balance. Measure C states that jobs/housing balance should be considered in the
establishment of the STMP. In addition, West County jurisdictions are struggling to
attract jobs, retail services, and sales tax revenue, and believe that a fee on commercial
development any higher than 20 cents per square foot will defeat economic development
goals.
In order to reduce the financial burden placed on commercial development, the WCCTAC
has agreed to discount the fee for all commercial space to 20 cents per square foot. It also
reduced residential fees, but the reduction is not as much as for commercial uses. In
addition, the trip generation rate for multi-family units is at a higher rate than the ITE
rate. This fee schedule would generate approximately $5.1 million over the next 13 years,
roughly 21 percent of the total $24.5 million in unfunded needs.
_ This fee schedule sets fees far below the maximum $24.5 million funding threshold
established by the VMT Analysis and the preliminary fee schedule. These fees are shown
in Table 9.
Table 9. Fee Schedule (1997- 2010)
Land Use Categories 1997 Dollars
Single Farrly Residential $700
Multi Family Residential $560
Retail per square foot(<200 ksf) $0.20
Retail per square foot(>220 ksf) $0.20
Office per square foot $0.20
Industrial per square foot. $0.20
Total Revenues ($1,000,000) $5.1
Cambridge Systematics,Inc. 9
Notice of Public Hearing
FORMATION OF THE WEST CONTRA COSTA
SUBREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE AREA OF BENEFIT
Notice is given, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65091 and 66474.2 (b), that
Contra Costa County has initiated proceedings to form the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit and to adopt certain
transportation mitigation fees. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will hold
a public hearing on Tuesday, April 15, 1997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Board Chambers
located at 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, to consider the following actions: (1)
adopting the Development Program Report for the West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee; and, (2) adopting an ordinance which includes
establishment of the project list, fee schedule, and boundaries for the West Contra
Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit.
The West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program will be
implemented in conjunction with the cities of EI Cerrito, Richmond, Pinole, and
Hercules and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) for the purpose of
funding through local development mitigation fees a share of the cost to improve State
Route 4 West (between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 80). A key objective of this
proposed program is to insure that new development in western Contra Costa County
will pay its fair share for the cost of improving State Route 4 West, made necessary by
new travel demands placed on the highway from such development. Under this
program, Contra Costa County would be responsible for collecting a transportation
mitigation fee from new development within the unincorporated portions of western
Contra Costa County (see the map below) at issuance of a building permit, based on
the following proposed fee schedule:
Land Use Tvoe Fee Amount
Single family residential 5700.00/dwelling unit
Multi family residential 5560.00/dwelling unit
Commercial, Office, Industrial, Retail S 0.20 per sq. ft. gross floor area
Other uses not fisted above $150.00 per trip generated
elvq
I of 11
V:
u
fsun
Sen Pablo Be �. K.l� b"'"..,1
f Y ^� T
a
° WCC t
Fee Area
Man Contra Costa County
NX
) r Oakland COU
^
San
Francisco y �Y Al�`MEOA
A complete description of the ordinance, fee schedule, boundaries, and project list for
the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program and
methodology used in determining the fees will be contained in a Development Program
Report which will be on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday,
April 1, 1997 and available for public inspection. For more information regarding this
matter, contact Patrick Roche, Transportation Planning Division, Community
Development Department, at (510) 335-1242.
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Q" "ra
FROM: SUPERVISOR JIM ROGERS, DISTRICT I
Costa
DATE: February 11, 1997 Cointy
SUBJECT: RESCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON THE PROPOSED WCCTAC SUBREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION
MITIGATION PROGRAM
RESOLUTION NO. 97/85
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1) Reschedule the February 25, 1997 public hearing date on the WCCTAC
subregional transportation mitigation program, to Tuesday. April
15. 1997,at 2 :00 P.M. , to consider adoption of an ordinance establishing
the West Contra Costa subregional transportation impact mitigation fee;
2) Reaffirm previous actions approved by the Board on August 13, 1996
(agenda item D.8) and November 19, 1996 (agenda item S.D 4 ) , in regard
to the proposed West Contra Costa subregional transportation impact
mitigation fee;
3) Re-direct the Clerk of the Board to publish a notice in the manner
prescribed in Government Code Sections 66474 .2 (b) (2) and 65090 (a) ;
4) Re-direct the Public Works Director to give notice of the hearing and to
file a copy of the Development Program Report with the Clerk of the Board
in accordance with Government Code Sections 54986 (a) , 65091, 66016 (a) and
66484 (a) .
FISCAL IMPACT
No impact to the General Fund.
CONTINUED 0$ ATTACHMENT: x_ YES SIGNATURE ycttj
_ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATIONOFBOARD COMMITTEE
_ APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON 0a—/ - APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER _
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Orig. ATTESTED % 1l a 19_9_7
cc: Irma Anderson, WCCTAC Chair PHIL BATCHELOR, C11RK O
Community Development Department THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Public Works Department AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
BY DEPUTY
RESCHEDULE PUBLIC HEARING DATE ON THE PROPOSED WCCTAC SUBREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PROGRAM
February 11, 1997
Page Two
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
In November 1996, the Board of Supervisors scheduled a public hearing for
Tuesday, February 25, 1997, to consider adoption of an ordinance
establishing the West Contra Costa subregional transportation impact
mitigation fee. This hearing date now conflicts with a special workshop
session on Social Services and General Assistance that has also been
scheduled for the Board's February 25th meeting. The County
Administrator's Office (CAO)has asked that the public hearing on the
proposed West Contra Costa subregional transportation impact mitigation
fee be rescheduled for a later date so as to avoid a conflict with the
Board's workshop on Social Services and General Assistance.
I concur with the CAO's request and recommend that the public hearing on
the proposed ordinance be rescheduled for a new hearing date on April 15
1997 at 2 : 00 P.M. Accordingly, I also ask the Board to reaffirm two
previous actions taken on this item (August 13, 1996 and November 19,
1996) , and re-direct the Clerk of the Board and Public Works Director to
publish notice of a hearing in accordance with the Government Code based
on the new hearing date.
JR/PR/j: proch/wcctac/rogers.b03
A
O fip
�nO
�+ 00
�+ F
00
CD czo mrn' i UP ' Gy
a o ;-A i
n �m
-� c
O
G �•N G� Q � N � � O p .rf �p N L
�► 7� 3 � `"' `' �;• meq� .�C. 'a w 2 c`1
�@ � � � � �i � Z•2N W Wni N
cAo ~ 7OL_m
a W
N '
a r g�K ,n � �• o �mgi;G oZmG �' ��
9c CD ° W (40� Q N c
71
�+ 0
N y moc r
N
m i
� 2
G 0
r
ro
a
G p� mpn G Sm O Z
0 0 N ` m Om Q Z N Afy O (QL O^
9m qM q >NW
�'+ X m?S �
0o N C
Y � �
P
m aGm
ro Y
Y 4 m {'{iv N 9 2 �•'>
O X O 00
y \H � w
O O
Notice of Public Hearina
FORMATION OF THE WEST CONTRA COSTA
SUBREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE AREA OF BENE](1)
Notice is given, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65091 and 66474.2 (b
Contra Costa County has initiated proceedings to form the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit and to adopt certain
transportation mitigation fees. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
a public hearing on Tuesday, April 15, 1997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Board Chamb
located at 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, to consider the following actio
adopting the Development Program Report for the West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee; and, (2) adopting an ordinance which includes
establishment of the project list, fee schedule, and boundaries for the West Contra
Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit.
The West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program will be
implemented in conjunction with the cities of EI Cerrito, Richmond, Pinole, and
Hercules and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) for the purpose of
funding through local development mitigation fees a share of the cost to improve State
Route 4 West (between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 60). A key objective of this
proposed program is to insure that new development in western Contra Costa County
will pay its fair share for the cost of improving State Route 4 West, made necessary by
new travel demands placed on the highway from such development, Under this
program, Contra Costa County would be responsible for collecting a transportation
mitigation fee from new development within the unincorporated portions of western
Contra Costa County (see the map below) at issuance of a building permit, based on
the following proposed fee schedule:
Land Use Tyne Fee Amount
Single fandly residential $700.00/dwelling unit
Mold family residential $560.001dwentng unit
Commercial, Office, Industrial, Retail $ 0.20 per sq. ft. gross floor area
Other uses not tasted above $150.00 per trip generated
,
9uiunm gay a Ma s51,s 1 v?1 •;,?i�p e!!�
San P**8a � V""�^ y 5r '"" y �✓ y�.!
l Y
Fee Area
Marin Contra Costa County
Oakland 10)AGCUtyf{ "
{Franctsco
t
A complete description of the ordinance, fee schedule, boundaries, and project list for
the West Contra Costa Subregiona!Transportation Mitigation Fee Program and
methodology used in determining the fees will be contained in a Development Program
Report which will be on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday,
April 1, 1997 and available for public inspection. For more information regarding this
matter, contact Patrick Roche, Transportation Planning Division, Community
Development Department, at (510) 335-1242.
ATrEnn: February 11, 1997
BY:! 2
61
DATE(S) of PUBLICATION: MARCH 9, 1997
--------------------------
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: February 12, 1997
TO: Shirley Casillas, Office of Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
FROM: Patrick Roche, Transportation Planning DivisionvlWr �
SUBJECT: Noticing of Public Hearing on Formation of West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit
As you are aware the Board of Supervisor on 2/11/97 rescheduled the public hearing date for the
proposed WCCTAC Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program to April 15, 1997.
Attached you will find a display advertisement of the public hearing notice for publication in the
West County Time .
Based on a new hearing date, 4/15/97, the schedule for publication of the hearing notice and file
availability for public review, would be as follows :
DATE ACTION
Sunday, March 9, 1997 Notice of Public Hearing published in the
Sunday edition of the West County Times.
Tuesday, April 1, 1997 File available for public review at Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors. File will include
ordinance, fee schedule, boundaries, and
project list for the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee
Program.
Tuesday, April 15, 1997 at 2:00 P.M. Board of Supervisors conducts Public Hearing
on West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee Program.
Also, attached per your request, are excerpts from the Government Code cited in the 2/11/97
Board Order to reschedule the public hearing date.
Call me if you have any comments or questions regarding this matter.
attachments(2)
Display Ad,Public Hearing Notice
Excerpts of the Govl.Code Sec.
cc: S.Goetz,CDD-TPD
J.Bueren,PWD-TE
D.Schmidt,Co.Counsel
K.Nimrr,Sup.Rogers'Office
PR/prochwcctscNcbos.wct
TBU 10;77 FAS 610 313 2333 CCC PUBLIC WORKS COV.DEV.FOURTB IZO02
Y9PJ4MisiNT CCDE $ 65090
tbl This taelioa shall beoomb Inoporstivo on June 1,1080,and ea of dsnuM 1,19K Is mpasied,untaaa
I later ensued wrote, Wbkb bMwM eCN*'e on or boibm Jtnatby 1, Ift wee or emadt the
den an which it bvr m"iaoparau"and ie"Pow,
amu (Far=e 16600.7.added by State
A of w t34ott 19tu,c 1348'{A$,19G9),i : w
mePaat.M F z Nae 7671 D'b"Sf i ••
To F
14, TAts eaWon bw mac btoparati Ca
isc i eawe swo eteuclttg m mitt {
The study allowing comonitteo oemt
lowy
oonlomg adoZoawimodxl Derwtabut tam m tux-j a"IT make svailaw Aroran —
rm slog and Development A�(a be 6tw Tiompumotlon Fund
to ar+fitnd of v+a' tkn
Th ��—
prWatta. e dadmtod man"Adl au6mit a the Lo&ktura mi.law then 1a bI497,
a, ra8ardina the Bndiaga of seas damottatradon pt 1poCL
(Added by Ob"INC e. 1146(JU.IM 1 !L)
! 630iA.i9. Fxpsttdltttrai pur�passa !y
andrr�. pumanaMdom ttsilonay too section 44243 orr the IIwth ed in the 114y d IWo�Code Nr�puriw of
Implementing ptmgreph (9) of subdivision (b) of Section 86064 ahall atuataa the those made aro
&4mr cod as part a an overall program for improving air quality and for the purpose of tMa dApU&.
(Added by Staulu8o, a Lso to."t), 1 1.a
'Act
AML Chapter LT
Om
d by PUBLIC Ri"INGS
accuse Section
GM Public notice for pLmt (16004. Notice 417 a public heavi lc deGnwl.
t;fi09L Public natlen for profew, s w095. (kmum)" baarin9a.
fie. OM hda wl notify, 06080. Clrmetarlaa: cFnoyn in use far other pow
ywe ti6099. Falcons to rtw"notice. � la-
agencies;
notice by la
Chap0f dT taus wed by Status" a teen, fit
with 1 i0o80. PubIIo notice for Plans
with
wet (a) When it provis m of this dtle mqulroa notles of a pablta hoarbit to be glm puvwuattt to ihlr
Aed sectieo,ratite shalt be Published Wsat4ato Seetion 0081 in stleast one umpaper or,gtms al eusulatlaa
titthta the jurmintion of the load aysney which is condwft the pro e6 t at lout t0 days prior to the
heutryf,or V thcro is no auah newspaper of general circulation,the notion Md be poaunl at Want 10 days
pries' to Tie boaft In at !seat three pubRo plaoss ttdthbt rho Jwisdktlan of the bled money.
(6) The notice aha12 toaiuda the kAwmation apWW In Section 6500C
�
(a) to addition to the notice ro*drod by this%wader.,a local agency may give ootka of the heaving in
am other runner It doom neoeeew7 or doairabL.
(Mdad by*ttts1864,e. 100th 1 fel
of 16etarloa!and CiatutaT Kota
D"WAXW Wen Fanner 1 WMA,added by Stela.=a.list,P.30L
the 1,60049ec lament rdAw to tka06t804. a. lase, arae f I.
%0) Acte radar Edua.Q 1 woo&
not gpe 6oti # FFwWr� OMI, ,06000.a dW by
ble
Addldol a or o t ag" he l ttad by .gmkvi dela6ans by asterisks •
sm
lift
� 1 § 65090 GOVERNMENT CODE GOVERNMI
1I Library References $ 65093. Fail
}{1 Califernia Practice Guide: Iavullord-Tenant,Friedman. chapter paragraph number refereares to Paragraphs The failure
!� Garcia& Hagarty,ace Guide's Table of Statutes for discussing this seldon.
Procedures est
actions of a lot
$ 6509L Public notice for projects (Added by
Stu
(a) When a provision of this title requires notice of a public hearing to be given pursuant to this
ff; section,notice stall be given in all of the following ways:
(1) Notice of the hearing aha}}be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the heating to the owner Lege lative aU
of the subset real or the owner's dal authorired nt, and to the eR-a licant teunder E b„
J Pr'oPeKY Y � Proj PP � note under Edur
YIi (2) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to each local Derivation: 1'
n
agency to provide water, streets,roads,schools,or other essential facilities or services
249,1.p.Stst .1 2.
age Y expected P sir § 1Ji: Stats.197s
' to the project, whose ability to provide those facilities and services may be significantly affected, j
(3) Notice of the hearing shall be mailed or delivered at least 10 days prior to the hearing to a0 owners I § di1191 Noti
of real property as shown on the latest equalized assessment roll within 300 feet of the real property that
is the subject of the hearing. in lieu of utilizing the assessment roll,the local agency may utilize records As used in tl
t' of the county assessor or tax collector which contain more recent information than the assessment roll. of a public heat
If the number of owners to whom notice would be mailed or delivered pursuant to this paragraph or considered, sen
paragraph (1) is greater than 1,000, a local agency, in lieu of mailed or delivered notice, may provide that is the suit,
notice by placing a display advertisement of at least one-eighth page in at least one newspaper of general (Added by Sta,
circulation within the local agency in which the proceeding is conducted at least 10 days prior to the
hearing
(4) It the notice is mailed or delivered pursuant to paragraph (3), the notice shall also either be: 1984 L gislati
(A) Published pursuant to Section 6061 in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the local Legislative ire
uc
agency which is conducting the proceeding at least 10 days prior to the hearing. nom under
Derivation:
u: I'
(B) Posted at least 10 days prior to the hearing in at least three public places within the boundaries of addrd by Stau.l
the local agency,including one public place in the area directly affected by the proceeding.
(b) The notice shall include the information specified in Section 65(194. . § 65095. Con
(c) In addition to the notice required by this section,a local agency may give notice of the hearing in Any public h
any other manner it deems necessary or desirable. (Added by Stat
(Added by Stats.1984,c. 1009, § 2. Amended by Stats.1985,c. 1199,§ 2.)
Historical and Statutory Notes
d1961 Legielali.
I931 Legialation Former§ 66151.4,added by Stats.1980,e.1151.p.9808. Legislative int
Legislative intent relating to Stats.1984, + 1009, sea 1 I. note under£dur.
note under Fduc.C. § 39002.
5 Derivation: Former§ 658545,added by S ita1975,c. ,
249,p.650,1 2,amended by Stats1975,c.1071,p.2414. - $ 65096. Clem
tj 1 Ls; Stats.1979,a 479,p.1636.1 L sig
{, i
-,u:' Library References (a) Notwiths-
dty county,or
California Practice Guide: Landlord-Tenant.Friedman, chapter paragraph number refereiraes to paragraphs ordinance amet
-{{ Garcia& Hagarty,see Guide's Table of Statutea for diseussft this section. y, permit all or or
I /� t,. .t{Ia+l�' :4i i ST and county sha
111 $ 6509'2. Mailed notice C�u� 1�&.t j
-`� _ I (b} Those re,
When a provision of this title quince notice of a public hearing to be given pursuant to Section 65090 the request
or 65091,the notice stall also mailed or delivered at least 14 days prior to the hearing to any person (c) Notwithst
who has fled a written request for notice with either the clerk of the governing body or with any other section to be at
person designated by the governing body to receive these requests. The local agency may c a fee
which is reasonably related to the costa of providing this service and the local agency may require ascii (d) "Cemetet
request to be annually renewed. of the Health a
(Added by St'ata19K e. 1009, § 2. Amended by Stats.1985,a 1199, $ 3.) (Added by Stat
Historical and Statutory Notes
ts94 Leg(aiation written rata e
( Legislative intent relating to Stats.1964, s 1009, ase interment rights
$I, note wader UmC.§ 39002 pursuant to this!
Additions or changes Indicated byedine; deletions by asterisks • • • Add
3�
f
GOVERNMENT CODE GOVERNMENT CODE § 65096
f 65093• Failure to receive notice
lonumber referescos to P°iaBraDha The failure of any person or entity to receive notice given pursuant to this title, or pursuant to the
procedures established by a chartered city.shall not constihrte grounds for any mut to invalidate the -
actions of a local agency for which the notice was given.
(Added by Stat,1984,c, 1009, f 2.)
to be given pursuant to this - Historical and Statutory Notes
,r to the hearing to the owner 19$4 Legblation Former f 664515, added by Stats.1967,e.87. P.484,
id to the project, sppltrairLLegislative intent MMM to Stats.1984. e. 1009, ace f 14.
rote under FdmQ f 2WM
it to the hearing to each local Derivatiom Former f 66864.5,added by SIab.1975,a
essential facilities or services 249+P 650,f 2,amended by Suds.1975,a 1072,p.7414,
ay be significantly effected. f 1.5; Stats1979,a 479,p. 1696,f 1.
r to the hearing to all owners
feet of the real property that f 65094. Notice of a public bearing defined
al agency may utilire reoprda As used in this title,"notice of a public bearing'menu a notice that includes the date,tare,and plane
inn than the assessment roR of a public hearing,the identity of the hearing body or officer,a general explanation of the matter to be
msaant to this paragraph or - considered,sant a general description,in text or by diagram,of the location of the real property.if any,
elivered notice, may provide that is the subject of the hearing.
zst one newspaper of general
it [east 10 days prior to the (Added by Stats.1984,a 1009, § 2.)
Historical and Statutory Notes
notice eha0 also either be: 1984 Legislation Former f 653545,added by Stata1975,a 249.P.650,
Al circulati0n within the local Legislative intent relating to Stats1984, c. 1009, sce f 2.amended by Stats1975,t 1042,p"2414,f 1S; Stats
aring. note under Fdue.C.f 59002. 1979,c.479, p.1636,f 1.
,nes within the boundaries of addediby9tsts1965,e. 188 Former V4 pv ,65500,S. 65503,
the p tn_roc��g.—'—
1 65095. Continued hearings
give notice of the hearinis
.� Any public hearing conducted under the title may be continued from time o time.
(Added by Stats.1984, c. 1009, § 2.)
Historical and Statutory Notes
d by Stas19W.c 1154,P 3806, ism Leaislation Derivation: Former If 65351,65355,MOD,added by
LegislaWe intent relating to Stats.1984, a 1009, see Stats1965.c.1880,p.4349,f b.
note unser Fdiue.G 1391109
I 65096. Cemeteries; change in use for other purposes; application; public notice by local
agencies; requirement
(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law,whenever it person applies to a city,including a charter
,mbw referones,to pwagrapbs city,county,or city and county,for a zoning variance,special use permit,conditional use permit,zoning
n ordinance amendment, general or specific plan amendment, or any entitlement for use which would
permit all or any part of a cemetery to be used for other than cemetery purposes,the city,county,or city
and county shall give notice pursuant to Sections 65091,65092,65093, and 65094.
_ (b) Those requesting notice shall be notified by the local agency at the address provided at the time of
n pursuant to Section 65090 the request
o the hearing to any person (c) Notwithstanding Section 65092,a local agency shall riot require a
ung body or with any other section o be annually renewed. rear A1$ pursuant o this
al agency mayor age a fee
al agency may require each (d) "Cemetery,"as used in this section,has the same meaning as that word is defined in Section$100
of the Health and Safety Code.
Lidded by StatLl986,a 1440.§ 1.)
Cross References
Writtm notice by cemetery authority to limebaser of
interment rights of that person's ability to receive notice
pursuant to this seetion,see Health&S.C.f 8120.
astaiaks : w * Additions or changes indicated by underline; deletions by asterisks
327
$54985 GOVERNMENT CODE GO
Library References §§
Canada 4Mt93.
C..J.B.Camila f 284.
5
Notes of Decisions
Amount of fees I tea. Conservatorship of Rem(App 4 DisL 19891268
CaLRptr.866,210 Cd AppBd 706.
Camties which have amemed re fry'for eufmtr
meet of the State Employes Housing Act are authorized
L Amount often
i Se
U never baud of supervisors ha determined cost.of there taof prodding maetl
spon and Permit aerviwa,
au
FwWmg public defender seirgms,Probate cavi is bmit� naw"a dbtg tower fee hmha sit by the Detainment of �
ad to adoring ring payment of so more than as or portion of Housing and Commudty Development 76 OPAtty.Cen.
each cat for public detarwWa representation ofcaneer oa 249.10-16-99.
§ 64966, Public meetings notice; public data; action of board by ordinance; costs
(a) Prior to either approving an increase in an existing fee or charge or initially imposing a new fee or iF
charge pursuant to Section 64966,the board of supervisors shah hold at least one public meeting,at which
oral or written premartatiotm may be made,as part of a regularly scheduled meeting. Notice of the time
and place of the meeting,including a general explanation of the matter to be considered,and a statement
that the data required by this auction is available,shall be maxed at least 14 days prior to the meeting to 2
any interested party who Slee a written request with the clerk of the board of supervisors for malled f
notice of the meeting on new or increased fees or charges. Any written request for such ma8dl notices
shah be valid for one year from the date on which it is fled unless a renewal request is filed. Renewal
requests for such mailed notices shah be filed on or before April 1st of each year. The board of
supervisors may establish a reasonable annual charge for sending those notices based on the estimated f
cost of providing that service. At least 10 days prior to the meeting,the board of supervisors shah make
available to the public data indicating the amount of cost, or estimated cost, required to provide the
product or service or the cost of enforcing any regulation for which the fee or charge is levied and the
revenue sources anticipated to provide the product or service or the cost of enforcing any regulation, e
including general fund revenues.
(b) Any action by a board of supervisors to levy a new fee or charge or to approve an increase in an ;
existing fee or charge pursuant to Section 64985 shall be taken only by ordinance.
(c) Any costs incurred by a county,a county service area,or county waterworks district governed by a
county(ward of supervisors in conducting the meeting or meetings required pursuant to subdivision(a)
may be recovered from fees charged for the product or service or the cost of enforcing any regulation 1
which were the subject of the meeting.
(Added by State. 1983, e. 295, § 1. Amended by Smts.1984,c. 183,f 2 eft May 25, 1984)
§ 64957. Construction of chapter
(a) This chapter shat!not ee construed as granting any additional authority to levy any fee or charge
which is not otherwise authorized by another provision of law nor shall its provisions be construed as i
granting authority to levy a new fee or charge when other provisions of law specifically prohibit the levy 1
of a fee or charge.
(b) This chapter shall not be construed as requiring counties, county service areas, or county
waterworks districts governed by a county board of supervisors to review or mise any fee or charge
which is in effect January 1, 1984.
(Added by State. 1983,c.295, § 1.1
Chapter 12.6
AERUL TRAMWAY PEES(REPEALED]
Section
649M 64989.1. Repealed.
Chapter 1E.6 was repealed by Stata1990, a 157E (AB-MB), f I.
Additions or cha#V" Indicated by undertinoi deletions by asterisks e.* • 1
270
.OVERMKENT CODE GOVERNMENT CODE 4 66474.3
* w .mks a OpLftyrA,, 334
p} Itdtisted proasadkets by way atoedtator,resohrdma or mmtiao.
"J imold a)1'tt4eabed Now Id the manna ptsQilred in + (a) of Section 66090 aoaiaio4n a
idea necks rice est. daatriPWn wffidem to no*W pobtie of t1w nWae of the proposed ewe in the app(ice"soot or 3/
woom man so nwpftw 17 tering 3d sr,& ipsd4e plant,x ma6Y or ddMdan aedlaaeem %4 J _
*�6orkrCa ! ,rananaa innartea se a rmttlt d sere proeaedinis wh lace in allod dde tee 1an1 1 fmay artliamerems. pilkits, or !(.4•iW�
l )sem tq .f1bvftkPmm Amo& i SGUICY&Mxc m or dtmppeoraa tee tmdddit mrp.
(t) U tee abdiryfon �l ratprrts eearet'r is spAcsbk and emenre, Policies r stardr+ls in
*rPerbr/dwambsdsa tete dsvel streets WDh the same p*d.say arom ma.pabdo or maadarda ado)ded pt mom to
wow art ars aaemtrdsl and aveid- the appucantli htQaart&aD apply.
qb fife!chow sea a�Pated bi ImAdmt : (Amewded by&ata.UM a U&1 1: 8tats.M.C 617,i 10•)
67
an K 177 eat am be perchers i
""TIK sear'drnkpr Z"r1 i Nath of Doddare t
*"do Impmew nodains
ft to he acrdaal EaYtbq rrtirem,doodul ti 0 Pekin 2 E.Wmer dd me repI , smart's ieamc flat do.
mw *on
I pwwwom K�6 010 r i law" t vdepw.at smr as nothees trves
tad.m mg oppuseeka ro
oche K
Tapmnea Mf ter a dp aaat7 pwmam w
comme:r or Loo Asses,ma,,a do elever.at items copsom.
1(App.l111LL 1M 9q lmdwtrem r esdaett ed t odwomm boo pro.
• L Nedra pored amb" I I led,dw.dry teed mot Impose mark
_ Cq "Wel mw se RM to quire t ev eper. t lu a foreseesg ms over^ vk.mruemiwwm am+abd WAU a that r
� va of W'wdwp WADr m>bstni atiadas tiemtlet Pro sed,w4mboo.polky w atand+ed w eke k drams.
menial mr'6vonat. or Poet aobdWahm aeemt thdiat by etq flat nr,dnion red adrGeim to dtym dutim wwdw&Kraetadaa raft.
OnAWS��a=M raSsiew Csonneae, p wmw I,aam sed $of*, K a7 rmidmtt 6ritM dellmaiowmariabirg sK PnadwbramodWepeft rPnWe of city
wavow ob.
1897 ks( Derdepmsm Anod- COL P4 20 CaLApp 4th 7Devokpow W- Ow of Tracy 83 r moat.merle mmPbYttL ��t 8Dpeavekemeot t.Cry o(IrK7(App 3
Gtltpr.2ltSitCd.App,1d yak, W46&4.11931) 4 tided 611, 30 C tApp.atb 70, u
w demdyw"maw venal twadve map deur ration pia'istmw
It maq board okker wwd r mom wave.er eaadrdms w iepoft . 2. lewma mastics seik meeik we�
Pekin
KamW appew.tion
Kar meow ad dima,wee rbaa aW wm prides not n dr
ds upon lit dead
and did mw 1906.bond is Cast wbo Is andtMd to ray an tompkle wdas tem■are ase damned eompid, d0'dW ale lame wdimu,m,Poaq
to medges,'aeeokifd *bar board ate' Ike6l t Der d i14 GIL m IN w.Cly K Tray(App 3 Dip. k
affed loquittog de wopter. me to "a
romaem WrLet SUN"ami
hearrs CaLApatd CatltPPath TEL r r,edi6ed. mprsae,w
uchaeobtid dos aaa(alred aeiq,rc larkdeded wt momforgruz ad ambodiev remirdm,e w w estate dry w fmpae
of TToP&W Ale's for a &eek Ore irnw.p&q,or mwedW K Public memey Which k Pon eadAd by d4'dePkkd req,d�,em rolati W*
P.2 Dist 1=yp �� srkw and memu&k k smoomably akailoet w mppremt w w.dw imprm.eaems,emodvd sped6wSaa did not
ALtittr•2i4 tolerated panic of their reepormoadw b emmwdke emprwly nadir sdngresebte6 K eedwioi dyYe Wali-
-* sate dndotwoot prR4eck and WWW slow w WPPiy rho but. n0ter,impar wmam*y.mad contain for op
otmeter e0ve Pow for(orpoow K wrm4 mem"b"mp pevre of soap wade r smatim Kde
astravdiety mwawle. Blida Derdopawm w. Cky of Tnq (App. 3 for dike taWtiae 6dibt Development v.
Dat. IM)L CdYWAd 614 30 CatA*46 Tea, as Cq K T1mey(App.3 Dia.M)Le CdY4a2d fit,30
Yaw a tatdive map,r a =adafed.Prriem dmkd. Col AppAS,763,as ardifid,ravie.demise.
aubdivisa d Saetis f 664713. Prericem inlumethe meaauret affodint(ardatlre project 10w17 eldaalt as bonds: project
K ale to peooead: Conditions
pew
03141 f 1.at Ort i. Ukj (a) if the kt(sative body of et d47 or eanty find&.bast spat fabetitttia(tsidas be the reaotd cert
any project for wW a tenteed"map or a rating tent Live sap his ban approved wD)be-Sod ed by a
V*vW y eaadad iniGrtjvt moats to the tartar tea ibtry)a lowly to be it ddmatt an!wS ameerred
bards isseed to finareae an tea projat the lag(staWm body aW aDow,tort portion of the
project aetvad by feu behrostrudwe to protect In a manna tcsirttot with the approved tentattve amp
or vesting teotaUve map.
(b) Fr I of tlds aroma{heef4ecrvd bond meta may bad Imaged pmatmd to tea laprove-
meret Ad of 1911 (DMxion 7(corrmemee rt settle Section 6000)of the Serves and HW=ys Code),the
ds appikeer Mw&ipW impswamat Ad of 1913 (E)W m 12(aoramnoag with Srtiou 10000)of the Strmetm sad
Higbways Code).the impwa
etat oo Bad Ad of 1916(DNis10(dommerAkq with Section 8600)of the
nly shooto aPPtove r Stress and Righways CodeL or the Uello-Roc Cemmnaky Feed likiew Ad of 1982 (Qwpta 25
I the applirtiampolicim (mw wndag with Sadist 63311)of Pari I of Mvisme 2 of Title 6,so long as Ow bond was Seemed led
odd at Sara 90 days before the peopmad Wtistive was adopwd by 60wr popular volt at an elertSme or by
sermmed a s tion fr a ierdemmm adopted by the k;idatift bogy
eke fa&°wrng.' US Neewkhsisredint subdivision leek the Setidatim body may wea t(oa or deny a pesmiL oppeoval
its . r • es4puiooe,or adtl mwnt If it detenaSns mey of the follwbW
Addaiceft of ChWVU ktdkeatad by eredsAkre; daNtbetr by asterisks • '"
166
§56474 GOVERNMENT OODE
NOW t
re Nut Womb"mbdmisi m«rep Cwhnned u mein[ mat mswwbad in thk wdm 90 OpAur.Om 2t6,
bwinacbtmat4wanwtdchoWas hapepalydarkd 44141.
homse of tneorrmet Lriap egsda d ok mcdo did mat
smAk Optimal b ed
WPWW ms 4. the M aS«t R •deladea/m tier ted.
unbar bat
with mo b"arty bdomd matoera ewosmdo""dewslopment www mace m volau tlai"wires
**. r mdm im t Pro mu a bad b ie/slat d apptio- snow dmmte w mappacNd by aitbdrat evlaoe.6•
AM t and
SCUA W bra bar an r wees pekr M k lcW aptly rade by msuny dspartmenl d r*
doll 1W. app ofs did met � sty eseted elgbta mdadir9 Topeap Aa1 fir a Sark Camsad I
palmar.Siam a.Wk 46 Vmtrra awry(App.tDia- W.ON *ofPlannIg. Amides
IfBD IM GUyta d9I.194 CmiXppfd 7716 W.flrmld'd La Artelms(Odenoet Davalgmama Aams&
If*aWea d sdrwee endo, -, , dmerm *A-- awuFF 2 Dem.Hall26t ai.Spa.214.n4 CdA*U
math to taandme resp at a1 0 11oe nkte Y
dadta mf ar}topomd bKron�nI dmobdirika baa) Camd7 board of we WddttmemirNaa S d dnd
agmey mW pet Apra as amp wdw FdOW&r. s�eatarpaprtrwddaetarmmabMmiWaeda.Ord
t 23061. 46 OpaAery.Om 10t."245. aNe k#wy r w0dtik hNtat was mypwW by m lldesd
aoidems.avm IlWwO 97 am Of pI ark trams is prgfm
2. t'kt6pP.ire comm was.raid be dmraayed.wham dnmkpm sbiatead 04
Demmsd app'wd p v"m of patak Stine obit Ad tram p olt,end Ward 9300 Wmnpad 0041tim regovw
(t am ad9era wqk revafamsaat d t!6474 d at Ory npbmama d am a be remwd With mew trams r ,
am deny wil,64(m app applimu m.dams eW rack and pukes a.e+omm rapvaeerim d nww ig pees daft
mpa.A /admoL Se*tw v. C y Quad of ft at amd after d*vW*Mat of prajaec 14~Am%dw
Sedlmeds(App.4 Dist 1Mt)Sat C420a.06.219 Cab. Soak Omemmiy r.CsamV Of LAW Am2des (almmet
App.2d 2S9,rev We denial Dxnbpm"Aood")CAPD 2 Dirt 1605 261 akRptr.
214 214 Cd,ApW 12th.
1 iknQidenq.MGega alae P at arck"Diegkil temoarmm m property
Oy molews drift that&Wwpa's pupmd Project dam met nqube *Wkq tbat dmrdapmeot of property
ren mmoWmat Mtb eay'm applig"Rarerw plan wms arcaw" real mom t Ore en the m.ieeemmt'«
cong Ort with lar cher wms uatimevidma that a WA .ms `enbatanUal woV moeW"wee maul require does
qpb=bk
with bard we dmsipuatim fa She red wIN or project. Upmro Avi a far a Samir Community
t W d W rhA &q� i�d� Angeles taboo DaKiop mat Ammd-
pah M&xomommm Assn Y.CSV d Oslmed(W.P.N. ata4(tPP 2 Dbt!Mt)20CatRptr.:1..214 Gl.App,id
AamwWW (App. I Dim, 1993) 24 C LItptr2d = 23
Cd.AgpAth 701. 11&That properV to be derdeped omWad aeshaeobgw
oA Darien resebcom" akes did eat preclude owny bard of m vAmrs tram
A WW govaaamt may am apPtove tri abamet"r« Sadimg that devolop W wool ea mare submtaesid mvL
of Wdlimmmmn Aa (f 51200 at N43 mare POPOV neam"a+l damage amd did mat ngdtt band to bnpom
mtdah b eat mmiment with W current gmmmerw pkat aider enmd)tima as derebper 4ukmW is aoitmte SWASOM
the ti bwoe pevidw d SWa.Iml.a low Q OpL Orem of Pnje m vd,,,WgiW wravem,whore bead
An,vrm 247.S". pude m tb+dnt that mrehmmlViml Were eeetabrd mages
A wnutian map d a wA4w ba mut bt da;wv ad C auduao)agimi resomeaa Tbpmnp Ams's for a Samie
a WA to oma th deafen tegmemad of 9 9983.1. Cemmady v.Cony of Lm AAgdw(Oslarat Denkp
aappwwajow for iin darita.opt thwo rya nqdNemA is CAS 1Da 2 Diet IMO)SW Catitpr.114,
t 49474.91. Tentative OMP w psdbd map: aPpwm9l
NowiOm4wdiM subdwWm(e)odEactbp 44474.a local 2mvaemeet guy appra9 a tentative MIP,W s
pard map for wbkh a tentative asap was not required.U an environments)impact report was prepared
wtth mspat to the project aid a finding was spade pwwent to B!mgm (3) mttdivi"(.a1 d Sedim
21481 d the public Resources Code tact specific am mie.social.or AWmtrmderstiam ma'ti-e bireas%k
the moi2ation measarm or project dteramtku identified in the 9mviro m entSI kmpad IWW
(Added by Statist285. e.Td& 3 1. Amended by Stats.1994. t 1291 (AS3141 f L eft. Oct. 4. IMJ
ldbsAdw and Statutory Neter
1N Lwtiatati m
The 1st aemedemat adstawad a reference to pm
grapb tit)d aabd.W d t 21ON fare ldaenem to mbtl
(e)aft 21061.
f 469792 Approval of tentative sen w ilinance,V*Wm ad datmdards apphobie
W Ezompt ae Wterwiae provided iA enbdW6ioa (b) or (e), in dstwRinbW arbWw la approve err
diupprarm an appikarm for a tentative Imp.ere kcal agency shall apply only two ardinmem policies
and standards lel affect at the data ere local .Stacy has dddarmkted Heat the apPliellfam it complete
pursuant to Section 43913 of the Cowerreead Code.
rot Subdivision(a)"not appy to a local agarep which.beton It boa detembed an application(a a
tentative map to be complete pursomm to Section 659x3.las done bob of the fotiowinr
Additions or dwm9wa kmSotao by umdeAbve• daNtiom by awlertsks • • • n
164 '
i
r
RECEIVED
PROOF OF PUBLICATION 2
• •� (2015.5 G.(�_p.) CLEflK BO D OF SUPERVISORSCONTi;A COSTA CO.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Contra Costa
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the
County aforesaid,, I am over the age of eighteen years,
and not a party to or interested in the above-entitled
matter.
I am the Principal Legal Clerk of the West County Times,
a newspaper of general circulation, printed and pub-
lished at 2640 Shadetands Drive In the City of Walnut
Creek, County of Contra Costa, 94598.
And which newspaper has been adjudged a newspaper
of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County
of Contra Costa, State of California, under the date of
August 29, 9976. Case Number 488884.
r The notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy(set In
type not smaller than nonpareti}, has been published In
each regular and entire Issue of said newspaper and not
In any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
all In the year of 99..97.
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the
foregoIN is true and correct.
Executed at Walnut`Creek, California.
On Is .9..... day ofl7�j-l�- .%.., 19.91.
..............
Signature
West County limes
P.O. Box 900
Pinole, CA 94564
(590) 262-2740
Proof of Publication of:
fished}ed is a copy of the legal advertisement that pub-
'a 40 An,,L�StlOOV&tlanvai� l•oo I._ - _. -_ _ 'exaueo=-Y + — —
Notice of Public Hearing r
FORMATION OF THE WEST CONTRA COSTA e
SUBREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE AREA OF BENEFIT w
Notice is given, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65091 and 66474.2 (b), that
Contra Costa County has initiated proceedings to form the West Contra Costa
Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit and to adopt certain s,
transportation mitigation fees. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will hold M
a public hearing on Tuesday, April 15, 1997, at 2:00 P.M. in the Board Chambers '2
located at 651 Pine Street, Martinez, Califomia, to consider the following actions: (1) ■
adopting the Development Program Report for the West Contra Costa Subregional
Transportation Mitigation Fee; and, (2) adopting an ordinance which includes
establishment of the project list, fee schedule, and boundaries for the West Contra
Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Area of Benefit.
2
The West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Program will be "s
implemented in conjunction with the cities of EI Cerrito, Richmond, Pinole, and h
Hercules and the Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA)for the purpose of P
funding through local development mitigation fees a share of the cost to improve.State
Route 4 West (between Cummings Skyway and Interstate 80). A key objective of this n
proposed program is to insure that new development in western Contra Costa County H
will pay its fair share for the cost of improving State Route 4 West, made necessary by z
new travel demands placed on the highway from such development. Under this 4
program, Contra Costa County would be responsible for collecting a transportation ■
mitigation fee from new development within the unincorporated portions of wester
Contra Costa County.(see the map•below) st issuance of a building permit, based on c
the following proposed fee schedule: G
c
k
Land Use Tvue Fee Amount 0
Single family residential 5700.00/dwelling unit k
le
Muld faintly residential 5560.00/dwelling unit
ci
Commercial, Office, Industrial, Retail $ 0.20 per sq. ft. gross floor area
Other uses not listed above $150.00 per trip generated D
c
a
Bulwn Bay 6 Marsh? ` Wv ->.,
sun Pablo Bay L C� �' r 5 ` ? u
�4t�•� � n
0
l D
C C R
Fee Area
"°ars Contra Costa County �--�
L
a
w
" Oakland u
San pp C
I OU tl
Franelsco pW a
t U
I C
P,
N
A complete description of the ordinance, fee schedule, boundaries, and project list for P
the West Contra Costa Subregional Transportation Mitigation Fee Program andIc
methodology used in determining the fees will be contained in a Development Program A
Report which will be on file with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday,
April 1, 1997 and available for public inspection. ,For more information regarding this C
matter, contact Patrick Roche, Transportation Planning Division, Community T
Development Department, at (510) 335-1242. e
Y
Legal WCT 1985 Publish March 9, 1997