HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 7.1 Tri-VlyTranspDevFee
.
.
.
CITY CLERK
File # [Z][Q]~[Q]-[2J[Q]
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 18,1997
SUBJECT:
Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF)
Report prepared by: Lee S. Thompson, Public Works Director
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
1) Draft Resolution Approving Principles of Agreement for
Adoption of the Tri- Valley Transportation Development Fee
2) Letter from the Home Builders Association
RECOMMENDATION: / Review and Adopt Draft Resolution
,~'?5
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
If the TVTDF is implemented through subsequent hearing and fee
resolution as a result of adoption of the Draft Resolution by all
participating jurisdictions as proposed, new regional development
fees collected in the Tri- Valley Area for transportation projects will
be as follows:
Single-Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
Office
Retail
Industrial Warehouse
Other Uses
$1,500 per dwelling unit
$1,050 per dwelling unit
$1.00 per square foot
$1.00 per square foot
$ .75 per square foot
$1,500 AMlPM Average Peak Hour Trips
The total estimated Fee to be collected is approximately $65 million. This money will, in turn,
fund regional transportation projects necessitated by new development. However, the Fee will
not finance all of the projects listed in the Draft Resolution. Other sources of funding will need
to be explored, including the Measure "B" Reauthorization, ISTEA and other regional funding
mechanisms.
The 1-580/I-680 Flyover Project will be given #1 priority and funded first, and the rest of the
projects will be rated later for the development of a funding priority list. Each jurisdiction will be
allowed to keep 20% of the Fee that each jurisdiction collects, and that 20% must be spent on the
individual jurisdiction's choice ofproject(s) from the Draft Resolution Project List. This 20% shall
be from the first dollar collected before monies are forwarded to the 1-580/I-680 project.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
COPIES TO: Alameda & Contra Costa Counties
Cities of Livermore, San Ramon,
Pleasanton and Town ofDanville
ITEM NO. --LJ
g:agenmisc\tvtdf.doc
It is estimated that the Dublin developers will generate approximately 32% of the $65 million, or .
$20.8 million. Of this amount, Dublin could retain 20%, or $4.2 million, for the project (s) high on
Dublin's priority list.
DESCRIPTION: The Tri-Valley Transportation Council (TVTC) has been working for
several years on common transportation issues as well as the proposal to establish a regional transportation
fee which would be collected on new development. On August 5, 1997, the City Council reviewed a
proposal from the TVTC setting forth the guidelines and fee for a proposed regional transportation fee to
be known as the Tri-Valley Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF).
After the TVTC reviewed comments from all of the Tri- Valley jurisdictions, all of the jurisdictions agreed
that the I-580/I-680 Flyover Project should be #1 on the priority list; however, Contra Costa County
wanted to keep 20% of the TVTDF for their own projects, and other jurisdictions would like to see their
own projects as #2 on the list. The representative from the City of Livermore, in addition, did not want
any mention of the SR84 Toll Road in the Resolution. All of the representatives of the jurisdictions agreed
to delete language referring to the toll road. It was, however, understood that as part of the study for
other sources of funding for projects that the toll road would be included.
Unfortunately, the TVTC had a stand-off regarding the priority list issue and it appeared for a time that the
regional fee was in jeopardy. In the last TVTC meeting, Mayor Houston suggested that all of the
participating jurisdictions withhold and apply 20% of the TVTDF that each jurisdiction collects to that .
jurisdiction's preferred project(s) as listed in the Draft Resolution.
The TVTC members supported this idea and the majority felt that their respective Councils and
Boardmembers would support the modified Draft Resolution, with the exception of the representative from
the City of Livermore. His concern was that Livermore's Council would prefer the improvement to SR84
as #2 on the funding priority list. However, all of the jurisdictions did agree to take the Draft Resolution to
their Councils and Boards for review and to request adoption.
Except for the 20% local retention and dropping the reference to the Toll Road, the Fee and principles are
basically the same as stated in the previous Draft Resolution.
Adoption of the Draft Resolution is for the purpose of obtaining concurrence by the seven jurisdictions.
The actual approval of a new fee would be by separate hearing and the adoption of a fee resolution.
The Home Builders Association delivered a letter to the City on Wednesday, November 12, 1997 (see
Exhibit 2) which commented on the Draft Resolution and recommended changes. Because of the time
constraints to present this item to Council, Staff did not analyze the comments for this report. It would be
appropriate for this letter to be delivered to the TVTC for their further analysis, together with the results of
the Council's action on the Draft Resolution.
Staff recommends that City Council review and adopt the Draft Resolution.
.
Page 2
.
DRAFT RESOLUTION: with changes - strikeout
for deletions and underlined for (!dditions
RESOLUTION NO. - 97
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
* * * * * * * * *
APPROVING PRINCIPLES OF AGREEMENT FOR ADOPTION OF
THE TRI- VALLEY TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT FEE
WHEREAS, the City of Dublin has joined with other Tri- Valley jurisdictions to form the Tri- Valley
Transportation Council (TVTC), and cooperatively participated in the development and adoption of the
Tri- Valley Transportation Plan! Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance (TVTP), and
WHEREAS, the TVTP identified improvements to the Regional transportation system necessary to
accommodate traffic growth from ongoing development in the Tri- Valley Are and elsewhere, and
WHEREAS, the TVTP recommended the adoption and implementation of a Tri- Valley Transportation
Development Fee (TVTDF) to fund all or part of the necessary transportation improvements identified in the
plan, and
.
WHEREAS, the TVTC has directed the preparation of studies and documentation for the adoption
and implementation of the TVTDF Regional Fee Program, and
WHEREAS, the city of Dublin supports solution of regional traffic problems through implementation
of the TVTP and the TVTDF Regional Fee Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Dublin does hereby endorse and adopt the
following Principles of Agreement for the establishment and implementation ofthe TVTDF:
1. That the TVTDF shall be used to fund all or part of the following Transportation Improvement
Projects in the Tri-Valley Area. It is acknowledged that at the proposed fee rates, the TVTDF will not fund
the project list in its entirety:
a.
b.
c.
d,
e.
f
g.
h.
1.
. J.
k.
1-580/I-680 Interchange Improvements
Improvements to State Route 84 between 1-580 and 1-680
1-680 Auxiliary lanes between Bollinger Canyon Road and Diablo Road
West Dublin/Pleasanton BART station
1-580 HOV Lanes between Santa Rita road and Greenville Road
1-680 HOV Lanes between SR84 and Sunol Grade
1-580/Foothill Road Interchange Improvements
1-680/Alcosta Boulevard Interchange Improvements
Crow Canyon Road Safety Improvements west of Bollinger Canyon Road
Vasco Road Safety Improvement north ofI-580
Express Bus Service in the Tri- Valley Area
2. That the highest funding priority for the TVTDF shall be the 1-580/I-680 Improvement project "Local
Match," which shall be funded at 100% of remaining local responsibility ($5.5 million), including
1
I.
DRAFT RESOLUTION: with changes - strikeout
for deletions and underlined for additions
reimbursement to those local iurisdictions which have already advanced or are to advance monies 0: in-lieu.
contributions to the 1-580/I-680 proiect.
3. That the following criteria shall be considered in establishing the priority of other projects on the
TVTDF funding list:
a. Project Readiness: examples of project readiness milestones include: completion of
environmental documentation, inclusion in RTIP/STIP, preparation of Plans, Specifications
and Estimates, right-of-way acquisition, etc.
b. Project Funding: Ability of project to "leverage" funding, eligibility for external funding,
and/or commitment of external funding.
c. Project Effectiveness: Ability of the project to effectively address Tri- Valley traffic congestion
and/or safety problems.
4. That the TVTC Technical Advisory Committee will prepare within 6 months ofTVTDF adoption a
Strategic Expenditure Plan for delivery of the improvement projects. The Strategic Expenditure Plan will
include preliminary cost and revenue estimates of the TVTDF, a prioritization plan and timeline for project
delivery. The Strategic Expenditure Plan will be reviewed and approved by the TVTC and subsequently
reviewed and approved by the seven member jurisdictions.
.
5. That the TVTDF Fee will pay for a portion of some or all of the previously-listed projects, on the basis
of the following Fee Schedule:
Land Use Category
Single-Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
Office
Retail
Industrial Warehouse
* Other U ses/ Alternative Rate
TVTDF Fee Rate
$1,500 per dwelling unit
$1,050 per dwelling unit
$1.00 per square foot
$1.00 per square foot
$ .75 per square foot
$1,500 AM/PM Average Peak Hour Trips
* (TVTDF fees for other uses not listed shall be based upon the average AMlPM peak hour trip
generation, as estimated by the most recent edition of the lTE Trip Generation Manual. Technical
procedures for the calculation of TVTDF fees will be adopted by the TVTC.)
6. The TVTDF Program will be reviewed biennially, and adjusted as necessary to reflect changes in
project list, project cost, program revenue and other factors. The criteria established in Item 3 above shall be
considered in the biennial update, as appropriate. Examples of "other factors" include amendments to state
or regional gasoline taxes, reauthorization of County Sales Tax transportation program, identification of
supplemental funding sources for Strategic Expenditure Plan projects, etc. Fee increases beyond inflationary.
and construction cost adiustments shall be approved unanimously by all seven iurisdictions.
7. The potential for a public/private toll road facility in the Tri Valley area to fund portions of the
Strategic Expenditure Plan shall be eyaluated as appropriate in the update process. If a public/private toll
2
.
.
.
DRAFT RESOLUTION: with changes - strikeout
for deletions and underlined for additions
road facility is implemented in the Tri "Valley area, the possibility of reducing the TVTDF fee rates shall be
evaluated. Each iurisdiction may retain 20 percent of the TVTDF revenues collected within its iurisdiction for
expenditure on projects included under Section I or as the list is modified by the TVTC.
&- The I 680 .^...uxiliary Lanes and the ,Alcosta Boulcvard/I 680 Interchange Improyements are included
on both the TVTDF and the Southern Contra Costa JEP..^... project lists. The amount of the TVTDF collected
in the SCCJEP A Area shall be reduced by the amount earmarked for these projects in the TVTDF, not to
excecd 16% of the TVTDF fee amount for I 680 Auxiliary lanes, and not to exceed 1% for the Alcosta
Boulevard I 680 Interchange Improvcment project.
8.9. That each TVTC jurisdiction shall levy the TVTDF on all Tri-Valley development not legally
precluded from the fee.
9.-l-G. That each TVTC jurisdiction shall levy the TVTDF on all Tri-Valley development with current
development agreements/entitlements which include language requiring that a regional transportation fee be
paid when enacted. '
10.H. That the TVTDF shall be applied to all significant changes to existing development agreements or
other entitlements approved after January 1, 1998. The TVTDF shall be applied to all components ofa
project which are subject to the amended or renewed development agreement/development entitlement.
Significant changes are defined as follows:
a. Change in Land Use type (e.g., Office to Retail)
b. Intensification of Land Use Type (e.g., increases in square footage of approved Office)
c. Expiration of Term of Development Agreement(s)
d. Reduction or Removal of project Mitigation requirements/Conditions of Approval
Other, "non-significant" amendments to development agreements (e.g., Architectural changes or
changes to site plans with no net traffic increases shall not be subject to the TVTDF.
11.H. That these Principles of Agreement for the TVTDF shall take effect upon their adoption by the seven
member jurisdictions of the Tri- Valley Transportation Council.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 18th day of November, 1997.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
g:\agenmisc\restvtdf
3
HOME V
BUILDERS
ASSOCIATION
0\
OF NORTHERN CAUFORNlA
Mailing Addr=
p.o, Box 5160
San Ramon
California 94583
200 Poncr Drive
#200
San'Ramon
California 94583
Td (510) 820-7626
t: . -.,
.
November 11, 1997
The Honorable Guy S. Houston
Mayor of Dublin & TVTC Representative
City of Dublin Civic Center
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
'.
Dear Guy:
Please find the following materials attached for your reference:
· One original copy of "Exhibit A RESOLUTION NO. 97-XX (Draft as revised 9/24/97)"
prepared by the Tri-Valley Transportation Council (fVTC) as of its October 29, 1997
meeting (pink copy).
. One annotated copy of "Exhibit A RESOLUTION NO. 97-XX (Draft as revised .
9/24/97)" prepared by the Home Builders Association of Northern California (HBA),
November 11, 1997 (buff copy).
. One copy of "Exhibit Al ALTERNATIVE RESOLUTION NO. 97-XX' as prepared by
the HBA, November 11, 1997. (green copy)
. Various press clippings regarding the proposed TVTC regional transportation improve-
ment fee (blue copy).
Next week you will be asked to consider the latest draft transportation fee resolution
developed by the TVTC. The intention of this letter is to express the concerns held by
the Home Builders Association of Northern California and its affected builder mem-
bership regarding that resolution.
First, you should know that the builder members of the HBA who are being asked to
pay the proposed fee do not oppose it. In fact, at several TVTC meetings and through
the local press the HBA has continually advocated that builders contribute their fair
share towards the improvements identified by the TVTC (see attached press clip-
pings). The fee structure as proposed in the latest resolution reflects what our industry
believes to be a fair share contribution, and we remain unopposed to the fee amounts
identified therein.
We do, however, strongly encourage member jurisdictions of the TVTC to consider
revising the language of the resolution to more clearly define the 41tent and regulatory
process that is vaguely implied. Specifically, the HBA feels the resolution should be
amended as follows:
.
~'I:S !:?~~ ~T
~ ~:" f: ,,";,.J"~,
[3. "'" ~..! .(.t.-. 'j:'>t. ,....
.:~ t:'i:~ ~~~ ~ t~. -
h~. "''' ",,,_I .
Z-.
""'.'.. ~
." -'-...
~
.
.
.
.~
c. Letter to the Dublin City Council from Phil Serna, HBANC
J RE: mc Draft Regional Transportation Fee Resolution
November 11, 1997
A. Acknowledge that fee payments constitute full mitigation of the impacts for which the fee
is collected.
B. SpecifY other possible funding sources that are available, or could be made available, to
complement fee revenue.
C. Provide for builder input through the proposed "Strategic Expenditure Plan" process.
D. Clarify that Strategic Expenditure Plan projects be determined based upon both the selec-
tion criteria described in the resolution and the current fee schedule.
E. Identify a specific and credible index with which to routinely adjust the proposed fee.
F. Clarify that arbitrary fee hikes over and above scheduled increases will not occur.
G. Clarify project "grandfathering" provisions and fee applicability.
H. Consider more flexible entitlement "triggers" used to collect fees.
As the above suggestions are listed by letter (i.e.. "A", "B.", "C.", etc.) you will also find our rec-
ommended language changes similarly labeled in the marginalia of the attached annotated resolu-
tion (note that the annotated copy [bufi] indicates deletions with strikethroughs and additions as
underlined). Other minor changes shown in the annotated copy are indicated with asterisks (*).
A clean copy of the draft fee resolution ("Exhibit AI") without strikethroughs and underlines is
also provided for your convenience (green copy).
Again, the HBA and its Tri-Valley builders do not oppose the fees as listed in the TVTC's draft
fee resolution. The HBA does oppose the current language in the resolution that, if left as is, will
likely complicate implementation and leave the TVTC subject to legal challenge. By adopting the
recommended wording as illustrated in the attachments, the Home Builders Association believes
the TVTC will reach its objectives in earnest through more equitable means.
Please realize that in the end, the HBA and its builder membership have not, nor do we wish to,
obstruct the TVTC from improving the regional transportation system. Builders and local gov-
ernment are genuinely allied on this point. This is evidenced by the fact that over the last year,
HBA staff have worked cooperatively with both the TVTC and its Technical Advisory Committee
to develop a fee structure that is fair. We hope that in the future we continue to work together
towards the common goal of improving our regional transportation system.
Please let me know if I can answer any questions or otherwise provide you with further informa-
tion.
72es ectfully SUbmitted.,
, rk~
~761
Phillip R. S;rna
Policy Analyst! Advocate
psernal8Jmsn.com
Attachments
Page 2 of 2
-:$...".:'",.;".-:, c" -,.., -:: "'''.,-'',<'/~>,-'>: ~-:~._~:r~, ~'r ;;.\ld\.;<::',"~'_ RESOLUTION NO,. .97.~XX~}~~"f~'_",I',': ; ,;:J>..';:\ <<11,,:'.<~\Z '~':'::<~},:,~", '''',:;;0 " ';;'~l':. ., "r
":r'~;,;;:;~~~~:~.':. f~~{~~~~~~~J;-~ ~;<:~~~~li. ~:.~:~t;~~f~~~~r::>.r;q..;;'1:.f.f!m;!.~I:i.;'''\ ~ .x-.;~...: .~'"'!..-:z n~n~:;mz7)~~""t~"t~~~'}:;.~0f..~"-!~-l;}~~-::i~\'~~~~~~,R. ..~+t,:: ,.,,' . _~ .\ ~\"~~;:~.t:.~,;/~ ::::~:._
",.j~:,:,~''':f'. ~'.'" ~'~;;!.ol<~'" IC)'~' :If,",' t~rt;~ as revzseu 7/.{,"t/7 f.t:"'*~:t>:l<"~' ,'~q. g':\"'l:Y:l'!",r,c.... ,', e,"';.". --""..C:' "
",~,;.., ' . :;."' -;'-:?~~-1lir;;o~'f~ :A.,;:' ;"~"i-<y'~; ," ;';"~~.~~~l~~'1;~,~,;,,:';;~:'i~', ",'t.a~-.,.:'~,~~,"-::',.' ,'."',, '.. ,: .....;'. ',:--A:;F"~;,"
~~:'L,<.", ';;~ ~}1>i~~~~<,.,,~,;"~4ti:f[~~~~\t:;i':"{~~".'~~Sf.t'I-~~~~~~~: _ ~'~":~4~1~}~J:~~}l~~;.: ~ 'NNt~~t~:~
~ ,""~-::;~, 'A:. I.ffiSOLUTION OE.THE CITY/COUNTYffOWN OF.<~ '~EJ.*~:;-~~?J.l;'"$l~;~>10::' :',--;~\1~i;;~~?i',:~i)
Q".....~-/....'"'i".,..";:~.:./..-.' ....l,t....,.....:i~7~......~P'";::r"'f-;::.,....,~ ..'- . ~ ~...":.;....-:-.... ~h~.fl.~_..~~\""1v;."':-.~.~...... f".........~':zi '>-'.c~"""~' t..-;~~""t:...,~
APPROVING PRINCIPLES OF/AGREEMENT.:FOR"ADOPTION OFJTHE ~:;:';,~: !~'':':~lJ}.t:r.~~\'):
TRI. -....'" ~...V~A r(F,vO:TRA.N...~,.t"'<"~'S'"'P'J~O-R' <T"'", 'TI';t'~"o' 'N' "-~D'vE'~VEL""I"'"'~O""P""MENT'<<l'-'" ......,~:FEE"'-"'..~,::;L~{~~;N~,:f"t l"~~; li:<0.:~';":~.~~":'4J~i:,;~',::,
- ~~~ fi _ ^' ,~~~,~'s;;~~~,.;f{~~:-:;~~../::~~~~!.~~:~..,t.:".;'1:..~c~~'
. - - r ~~- . .:'....:;;~\~.:;~n(~:~!~~fS{:./::~ ,.. ,:;~~>>..'::;ffES*:~~~7!:fYid:.4f.13ff-~i!;.;.;;;\~,~)Vl';;i:1tc,;~r-~~~~~{
i~~ ~{~~i;~~~~~:- ~i~~f,j~~~~~li;~;f~~::t~~}~~..:?~;!; ~~~i:~~I;
. l!y. ounty. owp.:5.0 ~~~H~/;~~'V.ii;~ -.' ' ~ joinedi} Witb1otherit!ri;. Valle i~~:.;
.;;:;::~~~;,l':,.~"i~~~~~lli~~~T" "{ T~TT'~"'~ T ~~~)\..;..>r~C'~~t~!j.lTIrrC'~~)'hS;\';'l'd ::'~~(:
W.u>ulctions). to J.orm~ e'b.'" n~ v cweYr~ ransportation~ oun~U}r \.L~!i..L, ' ~~ an '~'e:~
~~i:!:tt':".~lit~~~~ 'a .~~:..~t~r~:"~~~~~~_~~'}:~_lt~~ ~~~:-..~..t'~~..~,;;~~~. "~I~~' ~.~"l-..!~~: ~".;t'''l--.....;~i~~~~ &}.'~y,)
operativelyJ.. partICIpated <;. m';. thet'development!l;'andi adontIon? of;;. ilie~Tn;..vaney};":';M~;;;::~ '
"~J';'-':'~..~ "",' ,~.;l"'''''''. """"~"""''''' L"J:,.....~~.......,_:."l1f~.s"'~'"~"'-...~7~...~'<""'?'~"..,"'<,.....*="'..'"'""i">''l< :<':'}:''i.<f.y.~~'''':>J:'
t. iaiiSor:tation~IanJACtion .plaItfdr:Roiites'OfJ{e~'oruu;sr' 'Cance' );'and'~if:~:~.7~~lt]~,
~i~~ ~~ ~~~>J ,~>,,~';r>i'~' ~':'Y:iE~.~~::;~~~:~1'';''i'~'1\ :"~~,
-,.)(, ~ ~~.r~.., t" "::::.~.:t~-}"\";'~ft~ ;&ff..t!.~ :"R~~:;V.! M...1.::1. ,...~::r,~.~~~,:r...~;;~'
..0.;-. ~ _.. ..t.........~,Pt::c~ ~. -!\t!'t.....\~~ll.~ ..JlI>>'~~4v.7--.if:.';4.~~~.~~~fm~-r...I:>-.
AS . 'd 00::::..:1"" "..., .~~.'~..... -, ~'.'''ria1'- '>rd' "'''''''~''f, "-'i.'r'<i~~":\."'-;..~
~-~~' ,-< ..' ,-t';.l en t;U~"'Improvements~Jto.r;. e~o ~traIlSportation~system,;:,""1",..~..'L;..:.,
,'I!~ .~Yk1E~~~~~~~~~.re:g;{~'~:i:f-J;::~~~1:'i ~~~:t:O;:$~"'b:::\t't..x~~t-~f!~L~~:fr..."t\:>~~~1.~~J<'1':;'}"~;;"d%~~~I';;-"''!~'{~..r..?i.:."....J>t'i..th~f...... ~rT<;r,;;.:i:~~~~ff~,i~L
".<.;."i:.~~S~:';:'-'..";,.",,' . ,~. -h eces~ to.accommoU4Le'U4Wc.groWW< om:ongomg{ eveop-ment-,m' e~ n::lli,~S,;r,~~~~'~':';,~,....
~'tr:t~J;.~~~J;..t..~~ ~",?","'~~..I\ ~:.r:t'~.,-t.~.&.pr'''~~''<':f:,z;~ ~~-)-p.:-;.:;; -v..-'~'- ":..:p.;\...'-;-" ~..".....~-t ~~~~.-;~~~ .~:r~:i1{( ';"r';..i;Z:J-J,.:jJ..-<~~ ~V.~~~~';::"!"~r ..,~,,;.....
{:;c;H;:1.Ji'f/<i$[:' ~.{";, iilleY~AI~ anQ elsewhere; and~"::::G\t~, ~~) ~f::'ii.:~,~~~\qf:>~?{j::t~~::;~~';i'1J~~2A<gt~:;::~,~~\~ [:;~:;_
-;~; L";"-:..;~~~~',~~ ~~....-A15f;..i;\~~~~~~' ~:-':r.. :-~'-~1 '?4:~":..:..:!.r.t r':'<", ~!~-= '.I~~-::":"': ~'-~~'E-. .il-..:~:i--." f~'" ~!~".~"f~~...:'::'..(':\;.$'.~~~<:~ :')',.!j-"_..'!.;~~: ':,_.~~'~
~.....~.J;t-~...s\...-:rt::r~~ ;~'. "~~.:=.;.ioJ.~-f"~~J. r:10~ -.....~~.~~lt"".fl.~"'~\"A...;.~; -"..'-"~'~~' ;.!:~'~":~""'('.':.'~---<'" ....:''J/'''O-\,.....~~. "-':0 t-~J;........~~.J..~~ r;.... _ ......~
>.if;jp~~"i1:~:~_ 3-::~ -. r~2f;:~~~-:t-.;~;~t~~.:~,t:~..r~:-")~_.\~ -rrJb"~l ~-r.:f~~~~:rft-: (~:i ~.~~~:i1":;;.~J;~'J-~ -.1 ~::rJ~.~~~i~~';:~~(~~:::7! :::'::'f:::'~~:'i~~ /*i..;~~"~.~;~'f_\:~::l~~,\:: ':~i~~~'. ~~.-:-,
ik;~t~:r~;r,:WHEREAStg~ Tll~-:~JyrP'#'recomirleridedrllie'1 adop" tioIi~andliffiplemerifutiohFof \ i;;: Trio:- yaney' _:~'~-E:,,~~:/~"f:-',
~'- ;0. ;;,~...~,~-._~ ,-.... ~,,:~....E .~~~-:.......,......~ -....~;::LH...:--_:..~.~,...::.:..~r- ',,;~c....:.-.., r.'~'.1 ;~"'r"''''~:, '\ r.t... I.":'" =.... .~ -;:,-:, _' ",<' . -. -;, ~ ......~... ':: ',;' "'......... of' ........ .;....... ._, 'J," .....t ;0-' ' '"' ;::,_.... .: ..r1 ~ ,-_.... ., ~ ....' . - ....._- 't:'.......
,:':-':::'_(-)~I<':, ':;.:.'::::f:~''::''::?:~-:----}~~Trnns''oriation-Develo' menfFee'" TVTDF)"tctfuiid 'all <or' -.art "of tIie':-rieces' - " <I:,;:"':'~.i~)..::. '~."
~jil{~ltr:jil!.tl'~~li81~~(1~~i!!;~~1~lf
ti.~ '::"':,~F':::""':;;i.i-:.::c~':<e$<~f,=-~~~:~: adop-tIon'and Implementation of the TVTDRReglOruu Fee program,. and:':i-:~. 'i:',:"~;:z'<""~-;.~~ ":- f~'" .; '.:
~:~ r~;~~;:?jt~t~~lf~t~1tZ:;~~~~;'~;~t11t~1~~~:~~(~~~~i{;;j~;l~~l1s'ri;1f;~i~~~t~m:~~f;t.,~X~~~Ai~iqj~'~~~:f:~;~~;;';~{';: ~~~~~;. ~/:~ ,) ;:"~~_:.:~ ',:':'
~~3-j~:':-~'%J~ WRE.REA.S:~~ The$ CitY/C6_WiiY.rrown~ of=~,'~-~;;~~~~i::-2,;+~::;l~..~);-Siipports soluti~n:of regioIiaI tra:ffic~:: ':'p',:/3:..: :':. '.
.h........~,~......~..r.....--....l:h...~-...-......-l.-:!',..,--..._......... I'ol.,'...~'.....:;.....~-.--...,.,-..;.;._ .......... "r"~"...._-_...~. . . >!.' '_"(./._' . ..........'.'.....~
~~:::'~I ~{-:~:~~~~~~t?:fi~&:I~;Yftf problemi( tIiroiiglj; irilplementati6if o(.'the') ~ ~ '?rid. the~ TY'TPF ~ ~egicipal Fee'~: - '~ ,,~>,>'.:~: '..
:i~;E;'~g:rf":<('~W&~:;~f~~z:{~~~~tt1~1~\~'.'~~;'~~:~~4J~~~;g~'~,,! ':-};;:.' >:,-:\{; .", .' ' . '. ;:,(
< '~.:~~:/:~,j::~NOW;:THER.EF6RErBE:'r:t'RES()LVED, THAT'The-Cit}r/CoiiniyrroWn' of"" ,. :.:-"
'-.: "~\);/}~'does,: her~by: ,endorse.'~4 '~d~pY the'following' Prin~iple{~f: AgT~emen( fo~' the' '~~entand
;\,t:<~f)~~~I:!~;~~~1YI~r~fJ.~!;tg'~f~0;i~~~;f'~~ff~o~g;ians~~rtatiO~'
C~(..:~:-~~.~/'_ rmprqveme~i ~r:Oject~-:: ll;tlle'Tq:.V~eyAf~/It"i~' adm~wjedged 'iha:t"ai the -piOPo5e4 fee rates:'," ..
>r\i~c the0Mt:,i~\~f~~:Proj~ L)J;~;~"2~~')'~~~,:i":;:';:' 51:' ,. ..' ." 'i< .' .
--".~> a.:"'- '1-5$0t1~6,?qliiteicharigeIinprovemenis..~~~~~':~,':-~_;'~,~: .:> .. ..
b" '~rlliprovemenis to state Rohte 84 betWeen 1-580"and 1-680~":.. _.
I~680 AIDci1iarj Lanes b~tW~n Bollinger Cany6n Road and Diablo Road c
. <WeSt DublinlPI~antonB~T Station" _, ::~: "::' .
~:::- 1-5~0 ROY Lalles between Santa ~taRoad ind Gfee.nville Road:
I~680 l!OV LaiiesbetWeeli S~~4: and Sullofqr~d.e>-,:.",. ..'
00' I~580/F60~~oad/?~ Rarllon .~lvd. Int"ercillmge Improvements
. 1-680/Alcosta Boulevard Interchange Iffipiovements, '
Cr?w Canyon Road Safety Iinproveni~nts-~eSt -o~Bo11iD.ger Canyon Road
vaSco Road Safety Improvement norili of 1-580_
-c Exp~~ss ~us Se~ce in Tri-Valley Area. '
.-"!
c::-:
,~ d>'
.-:;.-:'~.~ -"-..- '.-:'
::....-
::..- .' --
e.::'
f
go
h.
.'
.... ..
- :-~
i:'
.. ., '..:
J.
k.
- .:~.:.-: .
-" .
. ..~: ~":'-
. .~'.?'.. ".:.{..,
o;flfi{t~~~
-.
. ;.:<~
-: /". ....
':;.
~
. ..- . ..
. l.:-
..-
-..
., Or""- :.:.
...t _! . .....:~f<_ ...;; - --- ..::-:...~ . ~:. __
"':~'.- .: -. ~~;:'~/~~:~~.':~." '", - ;:_.J."
_ ,..f
- '. ,,~.. ~.
. ,.-.
. .. ~ ....~
7
.~-"- -
'-,. -
. - . ~
.- ,; .:-
.-_F
;'".
" . -- ::_ .~ . . ,~ R - __ - . '.
.-c ~ ."
.'
"/'
.' ~ - ';"
-~ .
.., '
" .
f
t: -
r.
, .
f,'
:::..
..
EXHIBIT A
;,q >'..-:.RESOLpTIONN9.,9!-XX:., ".~ . . "c\'.'/< .'
q. .' \ ", .'., " '.' (Draftasrivised944/97):,~,.':, ::.., : ' :' ,'." ..
~':_ .', u. ':,':~l':~~>:.~":': '.", ""';:'(r::~:'.~.S:':::):.:./:::',~":'~: .(,,;,::,,' ,. "
:.'.. .',.'. ,.ARESOLUTIONOFTHE CITY/COUNTYrrOWNOE" .' ,', "I;:' - ..'
\~"',~::~. '; ," 'Y:'::.::'''APPROVlN'G PRiNCIPLES OF'AGREEM:ENT~FOR'ADOPTION OF:'I1ffi'i'~' ;;;~' :",:.-:';;:,~:-,:
~.~ .... _ '__ ._, ,"_~::....~..: ~. 4. _,:" ~ . .';"_ . .' ~. .',. "~_" :>:.1-,.':'. .':_.". '-.' ,- '. - __..~.:_.-._..J' /.,.... - ",' . .'. -, '. "'- ::'","
~.." '., ';": ,?<;~:~:, ': TRI- v ALLEY .TRANSPORTATIO~ D~~LOP~ ~~:!:s,:::,:,,:; :"; ,." .~ >:.'~:\':~:~=':~r:,:
I~....'... ..:~.;~~: .~~~.~i:r!~~~~~~....;:, ..~:r~:~;::it~ti~0~~~~,oili~i';~~y~eY';,c;iFf..~.
~." '.' ,"',,:.'C' ..,' ,0 ,.'W.,,;-;. '.:. , jUrisdictlOns., to '-:' form,~, the",~ Tn Valley .>.TranspOJ;tanon><r, Gouncil;" CT:Y'I:C), ", and"...,: . ,~",".\ ,:
~'-. ,; }~/:':,"~::~~ '{'::\~~~t:::~~?;~~rcoop'~~~eiy~"'p~cip.~t'~4rfiir~~~d.~v~t~~~~t~~r~~pti?~,1::~~, }!i~f:'i~- Y~ey.~;;':'?~~~;: ~~~~>;:
~f" :-:'~ ::'; ". 'Le' ,;,;"~,,,::~ TranSportat.i~nPhui/Actiori;PIan for Ro~tes of:R.-egI<?~,Slgnifican~ (ryT?),H and,'.~"~: > ":':{
~~- G. .~~~~0._ .c:
~~:. ' . .' nece~,t~ ..accommo~~,~,~c ~o~ fr~m.o,ng,~mg development ill. the Tn-, '! _ . ~
~. Valley ~ea and elsewhere; and ," . 0:;:' ': '. ,:.-; ~,'.: ,^'
~; . ~:.->, - . . ,. ,- . . , " . ' , .
~:. WHEREAS, , The' TV1'.R - recommendedth~' adoption. and implementaticm' of a' Tri- Valley
f~ Transportation'.Development Fee (TVTpF) to~d 'all. 9r part of the nec.essiry' ,
~., transportation impro~ements identified in the Plan, and ..
.~. ,
." , ,,..
, WHEREAS, - The' rVrc haS directed the prep'aration '-of studies and documentation for' the ..
adoption cind implementation of the TVTDF Regional Fee program, and
WHEREAS, The City/Co~tyrrown of ~pports solution of acknowledges
regional traffic problems and that those problems may be partially addressed
through implementation of the TVTP and the TVTDF Regional Fce Program.
~-":-
~'.
.
*
NOW, TIffiREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT. The City/Countyrrown of
does hereby endorse and adopt the following Principles of Agreement for the establishment and
implementation of the TVTDF:
1. That the TVTDF shall be used to fund all or part of the following Transportation
, Improvement Projects in the Tri-Valley Area. It is acknowledged that at the proposed fee rates,
the TVTDF Will not fund the project list in its entirety: '
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f
g.
. h.
1.
J.
k.
1-580/I-680 Interchange Improvements
Improvements to State Route 84 between 1-580 and 1-680
1-680 Auxiliary Lanes between Bollinger Canyon Road and Diablo Road
West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station
1-580 HOV Lanes between Santa Rita Road and Greenville Road
1-680 HOV Lanes between SR 84 and Sunol Grade
1-580/Foothill Road/San Ramon Blvd. Interchange Improvements
1-680/ Alcosta Boulevard Interchange Improvements
Crow Canyon Road Safety Improvements west of Bollinger Canyon Road
Vasco Road Safety Improvement north of 1-580
Express Bus Service in Tri- Valley Area
Page 1 of 4
r
.t.
f\
[.
-f.i
}D 2. By endorsing and adopting these Principles of Agreement. the TVfe and its member
, " . iurisdictions hereby'acknowledge that the fee levels as proposed herein. and adiusted biennially for
c :,~c .:'. inflation': when' irilposed.: ond rieW~'" development.":' 'Will' fully c' mitigate " the /obligation of new
_:.;:~::.~ development toward-all, regionartranspoftation iinpacts~ for. which the TVTDF is intended to
~~.f~'WZ~?~~l~~~~~~!i~:~t~;;:~ ~~fll!l~:~Ii;?o~~~'~'.hnProv=ent
'~;~I{iff}~l~tliiiii'il~lliiii~:p~::'on
I. ,,'. p' h' the TVIDF funding list. .',." ..,p' .. .. ,'.' ," , .., .. '., p. ."> .'- ~"~" ,",f..... .."...... ..
j~'~7~~~;jD,;~,i~;~iil~i:~i!ill}'~11~~~~on~~P~~~
~~: ..: .'.'.' .'. :" .::i~'.~';':;:J _ . .__ :", ,:":~::'-':;:~,'\.~~:~i-:,:7,{-)r::::~-~:i~;-~:::':~~::;j~:_: .' )~1::~:i{:-'>- :: . . : ,... ',"
l:~: -: . . : >; '. ~::~.",': Proj~ Fuii~g:.} ~~ty of pioj~c:t, t~; "l~y'~~ge;,: ~~g.-eligibili.tY . for external
~~", . '. ' ~ "., . funding. and/or comnntment of external fun,ding:-. mcludmg but not lnmted to: local
t~ : -. and state gaS tax' moneys'. tolls collected' from" future toll':road. improvements.
~:.-:::' . . .' . extension' of local" sales tax-. measUres;: iritended. fo{: regional: transportation
'r- ~ improveriients~ federal - sources C sUch" as that received through' eXtension of the
.' '. Inteimodal Surface Transportation EfficienCy Act' aSTEAt-and any and all legally
iustifiable proposals' to collect revenues . from purchasers of resale single family
residential units determined-, tc> benefit from the transportation improvements
funded in part through the TVTDF Program. . ;:', " '. ',:":' .
~.; .
,
c.
. ,~ .' - ~
-: .
Project Effective~ess:'< Ability of the project to' effectively address Tri- Valley
traffic congestion and/or safety problems.
tiP
*
*
II
.
5.4: That the TVTC TechnicaI Advisory Committee will prepare within 6 months of TVIDF I *
adoption a Strategic Expenditure Plan for delivery of the improvement projects. The Strategic
Expenditure Plan will include preliminary cost and revenue estiniates fer-based on the TVTDF as
'proposed herein.' a prioritization plan and < a timeline'< for project delivery. The Strategic
Expenditure Plan will be prepared bv the TVTC'g Technical Advisory Committee. comprising at ..
least one representative each from the residential and non-residential building community. each to ..
be appointed bv the TVfC. Following preparation of the Strategic Expenditure Plan. the TVTC
shall review the Plan and either adopt it as is. adopt the Plan with recommended modifications. or
, relect the Plan. Subsequent to - the TVTC's action( s ). each of the seven TVfC member
iurisdictions shall review the Plan and either adopt it as is. adopt the Plan with recommended
modifications. or reiect the Plan. The Strategic Expenditure Plan -vvill. be rovic'.vcd and approved by
the TVTC and subs:::quently rcyicwed and approycd by thc seven member jurisdictions.
Page 2 of 4
.
tI . "
~ That the TVTDF ~willpayfor ap6rtion of some or all of the previously-listed proJects,
.on the basis of the folloWffig Fee Schedule and the'Crltena'set forth in part 4 of these Principles of
~!; ~'.~~. '. A&re:ment(':;, . /:;'e~,:~!:;~i':'. ";(X~~~6H:~;;'~~!t:~~:':g.> .
..;, :<;', ,_' LandUseCategory,,,';:c"','-,, .,' .,'. "",.,":TVTDF Fee Rate ";,,:.'C:'-..' >""
(;: . ,<,;~f :;.,.\ : :\~:::~ ,;';,t:'0.): }:; ~::': ::c" ;:.iLj.~l';r',if'i'Xinjs~b'X >} ~r ...... '.', ". .'
_'>.'.,~';_ ,":;~::~.Smgle-~alnilY,ResldentIal ,j >'::~;.~{J;~;:f;:':';\: "'.~:;:f: '/;:/~~/'J $1,500/Dwellirig Umn~\~L. -':
,:;.. ~., .':A;. "r':' ".t.. ~ ._' ...-:.~: . - . ... _. .....:. 17 ~~... :..^t~.,~;7~.: ........;:. 'k~-:;~~~. .~~....; - ':.~::;:;-. \. . ~ ~4.'" ..~~.,,:,!'r ... ..1. ..- - a.. - t':"....;H,.. :;.., . .:'
'.<_, 0- ~ ,~ ','. MultI-FaiDily ResIdentIal'. ;-'.: ,"":-:".~'>c.';:-,~;< ~""~~;' .~~. ":,',-/~"'.0':' $1 050/DWellii1g Umt,.':~',:~-~,:,,: i':', ,
::. : .
.....:. ..,," IndustnaIlWare1:iouse~;~"~":''i'C-:'"'' ,.t"'H:\l",,,',~;~:l.,;,<,,v'-'~:"'$075/SqFt;-,;7'.;:]".:..,,........>,\>,....~,'-r..~:;..... ' . "
Iii'~ '. '/l~'~: ~::.~: ~:~':~::;~";('>~~~I?i~f~'P"0y;~n~~~st't~}f~:~~t:1~;;::i~:;~~if.~1i~.{j:%i.~~~:!;;~~2?:~t:3f?~F,::~\~ :~:' ",
Ii ~:' ':7 ';:'_;, :'. *Othei'UseSlA1ternativ~ ~e:'~}::~:',,;;~;.;1:::;'::~;/:\~:?J~i~:;I-::~c $T 5oo7AMIPM' Average Peak Hour Trip'
~":'~:rf~),~~ ~:~'. ". " ,'.
~:: . ;", .', *CTY!9!'-t~~, fo~ ,~~~r ~.: n~~ ~S!~~" ~~.,~~ .,b~~~;~P.O? ~~ '.averag~ ,~~ p~ hour trip',:
~. . '_ genera??~.-: ~ :e~,~~~,~ }>y ~ ;~~~.~~:S~;. !:~~e,nt.;', ~?,ltJ.(~m.~ ~f;: ~~ }~t!~p; ge'!~ration Manual.
~...: , Technical procedures for the calculatIon ofTVTDF fees will be adopted by the TVTC.) .'
&~.:' . . , ' ':"""" .<!::/,~,,}:.':~,.:{,:~;,'~~:{~'~,~;':::-' ':', : ,~.{:~~-=.'.':;:~'~t~f.<.'~~::'>,':~:':,., >:, ' .
k7.& ~The 1YIDF: Pr~gram.will be'r~~ewed bienni8l1y.'ancl ~djusted~' ne~~ssaf)~ to reflect
~<. chnnges ill project list: 'projcc(oo'~ progrnrrtr6~/eriue:'and 'oilief [aCtor{ The critcna established in,
.'. .', Item 3 above SlEll. be 'consid.er~d '.ffi')he 'biencial' "i1pdatc,' 'as 'appropria~e~'. Examples of "other ..
factors" iri~lud~'.ame~~~~}?"~St~ic. o~r: r~~,?nal. ga50fuie~ ~es,' rcau~ori#~R of County Sal~
Tax transportatIOn programs"ldentlficatlOn of supplemental fundmg sources for StrategIc
Q..-penditure Plan'" projectS;"etc'-':': . Fee '. increases' beyond' iBflationaIY and corist.-uction. costs
adjustm,cntsshnll be appro';ed OOarnmollslyb); alrSC~len jUrisdictions~ for inflation according: to the
Engineering News ReCord;s 'S<inFrilncisco C'onstruction Cost' Index.' No later than one month
prior to each biennial 'adiuStment iri the TVTDF. the TVTC Technical Advisory Committee shall
meet and recommend to the TVTC anv necessary modifications to the allocation of collected fees
based on the criteria set forth in Dart 4 of these Principles of Agreement. '
~ '
.
:" -
V.
i ~.
:;'T.-
h:~
.- E
". .-
.."- .
II
.
....~. -
*
8.-1;- Each jurisdiction may retain 20% of the TVTDF collected within the respective
jurisdiction for expenditure on projects included in item 1. . '
*
, '
9.& That each TVTC jurisdiction shall levy the TVTDF on all Tri-Valley development not
~egally precluded from the fee. ' .'
*
. '
1~.9:- That each TVTC jrinsdiction shall levy the TVTDF on all, Tri-Valley development with
current development agreements/entitlements which include hmgUage requiring that a regional
transportation fee be paid when enacted.
*
lL~ That the TVTDF shall be applied to all significant changes to existing development
agreements or other entitlements approved after January 1,.1998. The TVTDF shall be applied to
all components of a project which are the subject to the amended or renewed development
agreementJdevelopment entitlement Significant changes are defined as follows:
Page 3 of 4
F-,
1';'
f-
, ,
. .-- ~ .---.-. -. ---- -.'--- --..---..-----.------- ...------_....._--~-_._-- --.--. --~ - .--..-, -- .. - ......_~, .--.-..---.-------
~
I~
i ' a. , Change in Land Use Type (e.g:~ Office to Retail) ,
~, < <.":, ~"~':;\ ~~'";"~~~?f,~d~~..,~~; ~;:~~!jys in sq~~ f~tage of approved .
... , .;;.: '_ "';. c:\.;~,~>:EXpi.iiti9~.ofTerIDofDevelopment'Agreement(s):.. , , -. '. :.,',:'.: \' : ..
~.~~ : - , ,
-.:~. ' . _, /;: ", ::,}~.~.~er;:f~~no~~sigill.:fi~t~{amen~ents;~ to:'- deveI6pmen((agree~~ntf (~.g:;~ Architectural-. '
;t' , ":-;"" ,;. .',' ,..'>:~t~:::r'?~g~~~~ii.~~R~~?~~1?,:~i~gf,R~~~.~:'~i:i~~~~~W2?~es,~,,~~~~~~t~e ~bj~)~, the
;%. :..:.~\j:!.{:~,~~~~::~'~{~!f;~~~~c~~~r~e~~~~~~io~~!oir~6~~i~?~~~t~i~;:~-?iO~s~~:~~~ II ~~,:'
~~.~:-~-,:..~:~~:,.:.".~~:-\:t'amendffienfto'a"'developm'eiifagreement'ift"er JanuaryY(1998tsnalI"iiot be subiect tc)the' ':~'::':,'.,...
~,~.~ ~:~a"~
~:;,:' . , ~,<<: huildiIi'g perrrui(s) is issu'ed' or"upon' iSsUance:of acertificatefsYofoccupancv." The time of m
~~. . ..' ". -';:.~:'paynienf'of'the'TVTDF, for-"OtherUses"/as-;"deseribed' i!t'"part'-6'of these Principles of '
~:\ '..'~:~ ~ Agreement. shall be ne'gotiated on icase by case basis. :/-~'. ,'. ~, "~:. :,'
~~~:.:' ". '~'':-:. '.'.,' <.;.'.. ., ":~;:;';'!,'" - . . ..,..'. .-,,',;:';' .' .' '"
s.,. 13.ft That th~se PrlnCiples:ofAweement for the rviDF shall take effect~pon their adoption I *
:.-' ". "_",~~ ~e seve,~,~~~~~~}~~~~~~t~f~~Tri~Yal1ey Transp'ortation Cou.nCil. '.'.: <. :
\. . . . ~
~~- .
1997, ,meetirig of the
by the following
.
-:" . ~ .~.. '~'.' - -
~. .-.~
-. -." -? -
..... ~ .
'. .~, -"-
........"'
" .}~
. AYES: 1
NOES::'
. ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
:.J :".
., ',', ATTEST:
By:
nic\resprin2. sam.sm, '
rev 10/13/97
. " ~
.
:
Page 4 of 4
\VHEREAS, The City/CountyfTown of has joined with other Tri-Valley
jurisdictions to form the Tri-Valley Transportation Council (TVTC), and
cooperatively participated in the development and adoption of the Tri-Valley
Transportation Plan! Action Plan for Routes of Regional Significance (TVTP), and
.,
.
;J
!'
;-~
;-'
[:
EXHIBIT Ai
ALTERNATIVE RESOLUTION NO. 97-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY/COUNTYfTOWN OF
APPROVING PRINCIPLES OF AGREEMENT FOR ADOPTION OF TIIE
TRI-V ALLEY TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT FEE
Ie 'WHEREAS, The TVTP identified improvements to the Regional transportatioIi. system
necessary to accommodate traffic growth from ongoing development in the Tri-
Valley Area and elsewhere, and
WHEREAS, The TVTP recommended the adoption and implementation of a Tri- Valley
Transportation Development Fee (TVTDF) to ~d all or part of the necessary
transportation improvements identified in the Plan, and
.
WHEREAS, The TVTC has directed the preparation of studies and documentation for the
adoption and implementation of the TVTDF Regional Fee program, and
WHEREAS, The City/CountyfTown of acknowledges regional traffic
problems and that those problems may be partially addressed through
implementation of the TVTP and the TVTDF Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT The City/CountyfTown of
does hereby endorse and adopt the following Principles of Agreement for the establishment and
implementation of the TVTDF:
1. That the TVTDF shall be used to fund all or part of the following Transportation
, Improvement Projects in the Tri- Valley Area. It is acknowledged that at the proposed fee rates,
the TVTDF will not fund the project list in its entirety:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f
g.
. h.
1.
J.
k.
1-580/I-680 Interchange Improvements
Improvements to State Route 84 between 1-580 and 1-680
1-680 Auxiliary Lanes between Bollinger Canyon Road and Diablo Road
West Dublin/Pleasanton BART Station
1-580 HOV Lanes between Santa Rita Road and Greenville Road
1-680 HOV Lanes between SR 84 and Sunol Grade
1-580/Foothill Road/San Ramon Blvd. Interchange Improvements
1-680/Alcosta Boulevard Interchange Improvements
Crow Canyon Road Safety Improvements west of Bollinger Canyon Road
Vasco Road Safety Improvement north of 1-580
Express Bus Service in Tri- Valley Area
Page 1 of 4
!.
r
k.
...
f~
~
!.
'"
"
.,'~.
{.:.:.
",
i;
'"
(
;;.
I~
2. By endorsing and adopting these Principles of Agreement, the TVTC and its member .
jurisdictions hereby acknowledge that the fee levels as proposed herein, and adjusted biennially for
inflation when imposed on new development, will fully mitigate the obligation of new
development toward all" regional transportation impacts for which the TVTDF is intended to
alleviate.
3. That the highest funding priority for the TVTDF shall be the 1-580/I-680 Improvement
Project "Local Match", which shall be funded at 100% of remaining local responsibility ($5.5
million). "
4. That the following criteria shaJI be Considered in establishing the priority of other projects on
the TVTDF funding list: "
a.
Project Readiness: Examples of project readiness milestones include: completion
of environmental documentation, inclusion in .RTIP/STIP preparation of Plans,
Specifications and Estimates, right-of-way acquisition, etc.
b.
Project Funding: Ability of project to "leverage" funding, eligibility for external
funding, and/or commitment of external funding, including but not limited to: local
and state gas tax moneys, tolls collected from future toll-road improvements,
extension of local sales tax measures intended for regional transportation
improvements, federal sources such as that received through extension of the
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (IS TEA), and any and all legally
justifiable proposals to collect revenues from purchasers of resale single family
residential units determined to benefit from the transportation improvements
funded in part through the TVTDF Program.
c. Project Effectiveness: Ability of the project to effectively address Tri- Valley
traffic congestion and/or safety problems.
5. That the TVTC Technical Advisory Committee will prepare within 6 months of TVTDF
'adoption a Strategic Expenditure Plan for delivery of the improvement projects. The Strategic
Expenditure Plan will include preliminary cost and revenue estimates based on the TVTDF as
proposed herein, a prioritization plan and a timeline for project delivery. The Strategic
Expenditure Plan will be prepared by the TVTC's Technical Advisory Committee, comprising at
least one representative each from the residential and non-residential building community, each to
be appointed by the TVTC. Following preparation of the Strategic Expenditure Plan, the TVTC
shall review the Plan and either adopt it as is, adopt the Plan with recommended modifications, or
reject the Plan. Subsequent to the TVTe's action(s), each of the seven TVTC member
jurisdictions shall review the Plan and either adopt it as is, adopt the Plan with recommended
modifications, or reject the Plan.
Page 2 of 4
.
.
.
;:
:~
.
.
15
6. That the TVTDF will pay for a portion of some or all of the previously-listed projects,- gn
the basis of the following Fee Schedule and the criteria set forth in part 4 of these Principles of
Agreement:
Land Use Category
TVTDF Fee Rate
Single-Family Residential
Multi-Family Residential
$1,500/Dwelling Unit
$1,050/Dwelling Unit
Office .
Retail
Industri~arehouse
$1.00/Sq.Ft.
Sl.OO/Sq.Ft.
SO. 75/Sq.Ft.
*Other Uses/Alternative Rate
Sl,500/AMlPM Average Peak Hour Trip
*(TVTDF fees for other uses not listed shall be based upon the average AMlPM peak: hour trip
generation, as estimated by the most recent edition of the lTE Trip Generation Manual.
Technical procedures for the calCulation ofTVIDF fees will be adopted by the TVTC.)
7. The TVIDF Program will be reviewed biennially and adjusted for inflation according to
the Engineering News Record's San Francisco Construction Cost Index. No later than one month
prior to each biennial adjustment in the TVTDF, the TVTC Technical Advisory Committee shall
meet and recommend to the TVTC any necessary modifications to the allocation of collected fees
based on the criteria set forth in part 4 of these Principles of Agreement.
8. Each jurisdiction may retain 20% of the TVTDF collected within the respective
jurisdiction for expenditure on projects included in item 1.
9. That each TVTC jurisdiction shall levy the TVTDF on all Tri- Valley development not
legally precluded from the fee.
10. That each TVTC jurisdiction shall levy the TVTDF on all Tri- Valley development with
. current development agreements/entitlements which include language requiring that a regional
, transportation fee be paid when enacted.
11. That the TVTDF shall be applied to all significant changes to existing development
agreements or other entitlements approved after January 1, 1998. The TVTDF shall be applied to
an components of a project which are the subject to the amended or renewed development
agreement/development entitlement. Significant changes are defined as follows:
a.
b.
Change in Land Use Type (e.g., Office to Retail)
Intensification of Land Use Type (e.g., increases in square footage of approved
Office)
Expiration of Term of Development Agreement(s)
Reduction or Removal of Project Miti::ation requirements/Conditions of Approval
c.
d.
Page 3 of 4
"
\;..
~
.."
{.. .
r
c-
r
"
, .
e
~-
i.'
-: -
r
110
Other, "non-significant" amendments to development agreements (e.g., Architectural
changes or changes to site plans with no net traffic increases) shall not be subject to the .
TVTDF. Projects with either legislative and/or adjudicatory entitlements prior to January
1, 1998 for which the respective project proponent does not seek a "significant"
amendment to a development agreement after January 1, 1998, shall not be subject to the
TVTDF.
12. The project proponent' shall have the option of either paying the TVTDF at the time a
building permit(s) is issued or upon issuance of a certificate(s) of occupancy. The time of
payment of the TVTDF for "Other Uses", as described in part 6 of these Principles of
Agreement, sh~ be negotiated ori a case by case basis.
13. . That these Principles of Agreement for the TVTDF shall take effect upon their adoption
by the seve~ member jun.~dictions of the Tri-Valley Transportation Council. '"
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED AT THE-
Council/Board of Supervisors of the City/CountylTown of
votes:
1997, meeting of the
by the following
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
By:
.
tvtc\resprin2. sam.sm
rev 10/13/97
.
Pa.ge 4 of 4
'.
t~f>.~-;~ ,<
,..c
:ia1_
-. :-..:.
: .... s . :; =
State News
. State panel urges -. i
virtually eliminating ')
Public Utilities - I
Commission./38
~
, I
"
(
~t
~~
.:: I
".:.
. i
Tri-Valley
.paneI eyes
traffic:-fee
. ~.:~ ;"~i - .
. ..' ..
UNf~
. ~ .
~ I
.~
".::1
'-.-1
~
.-
.... _ --'::1 of
. R~ional: Levjw:01lld tap hornes~.'
. : ~l?~w~sS?1 five-cities~.lwo counties. ~;
.. "". -, . .- . ~
..- ~ "-. n;
. '~News~bltrW~~~(...,.. 'We will pay our fair .h.~;
-.....~~....__....
.Fearing-.:i:.~' housinf~m: the operatlv.,word b.in~i,
will cause Silicon ~ey-51Ze traf- ~" -~_. -' ",-;,",'~.-~' ,- '. . '
fi ~ .. . -.-- _....-~._.~~..-"""'I""..__.:.;"a,____T"~.
IC congestIon, a coalition 'of-EaSs',:- &&;..1;,0 ,...,~. ,...:,.. "'" . . 7._ ~~. .'''"C.'
B .-:......-...-...yo--....-.:.':':...=---.. -:- ~'-f
ay governments is proposing a _.-:~;.'~:~-,-'ri'L.:... S ,-', --. ."., Ji;,'
regional traffic fee on new devel- . .. .... ~~ i'(}..q t;l. . t
opment to pay for up to $150 jrJr the Hame !3u.lldersAuoc:'...a1.ro:"
million in new freeway and tran- oJNorl.h.ern Cai.y=a
sit projects.
If approved, the unusual fee
would be levied on every new
home, office and commercial
building in Pleasanton, Liver-
more, Dublin, San Ramon, Dan-
ville and unincorporated areas of
Contra Costa and Alameda coun-
ties that abut the cities.
"It is unique in the Bay Area,"
said John McCallum, a senior
planner for the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, of
the Tri- Valley Transportation
Council plan being discussed to-
day.
Cities and counties routinely
charge developers fees to pay for'
street improvements. The Tri-
Valley proposal is unusual be-
cause it is an alliance of seven
governments that have agreed to
spend the money on projecrs that
will address the cumulative effect
of development in their remon.
The Tri-Valley area, wnIch en-
circles the jnnction of interstates
580 and 680, expects about
50,000 new dwelling units in the
next 15 ea.""S - housing for as
.
Sunol grade is already ranked
among the worst in the Bay ..1J-ea.
Developers, who feel theY: al-
ready pay a high price to build,
are approaching the proposal
cautiously. ":...
"We will pay our fair share. the
operative word being 'fair,' .. said
Phil Serna, policy analyst for the
Home Builders Association of
Northern California. .'
The proposal - which is 'not
subject to voter approval - will
supplement Measure B, the half-
cent sales tax measure that pays
for transportation projects
throughout Alameda County.
That tax expires in 2001.
Four projects are tabbed for
funding:
. A flyover connection of
southbound Inter-state 5SD to
eastbound Interstate 580. recruir-
ing S5 million in matching :unds
to go with S 120 million ear-
marked from Measure B.
. Parking at the West Dublinl
Pleasanton BART station (about
2.000 spaces), at 541 million.
_"'T"_~ ....~.....
.
.,~.~... -.,. ;..... - - ~ .:'-.:
~
~
[".
;
i
L
i
'"
,_.~
~~
;.
t-,
t=-:
t:
~:.:-
f-::
f
f.
~.:.
f:.-
h.',
t
...,
o'
iI
/rt
,
"
~:>
.~
b
~..
2BA
.
i
SAN JOSE MffiOJRY NEWS . ~
-f
:r
- -
"j.!fri-YaJIey agencyeo~iders"
regioruu fee to address traffic "
.-FEE
from Page IE,
. '
:- 'interchange at Highway 84 and
~ 1-580 and expanding part of 84 to
~ four lanes from the Ruby Hills
development in Pleasanton to 1-
-680, $70 million.
.::.. -. Auxiliary lanes on north-
;' bound 1-680 in the San Ramon-
.: Danville area, $32 million.
- - .Bill Van Gelder, Pleasanton's.
traffic engineer, said the proposal
i. ,will add about $1,000 to $3,000
; to the price of each new home
". and somewhere between 50 cents
'.' ?a- $6 per square foot of industri-
al/retail development.
, - A hearing on the proposal is set
for 4 p.rn. today in Pleasanton.
. Although the seven governments
I ,studied the traffic needs coopera-
,tively, each one must approve the
:. proposal separately before it can
,. go into effect. That could occur
, _,by early next year. Unless the
_ five cities and two counties aD-
. ' prove one fee structure, the pro..
; posal will die. '. - .- . . ..
, - -:Liverrnore Councilman Torn
_. Reitter, a committee. member;
-:. ~ays the, proposal is woefully in-
'-adequate.
. , Reitter cites a traffic study pro-
- duced by the Tri-Valley Trans-
por..ation Council that identified
11 needed traffic projects worth
a combined S385 million. He
doubts the seven governments -
some of whom he says are sympa-
'The C?o,mputer models
have shown that traffic
will get significantly worse
. . . over the next 20 years
- it will get worse no
matter what.'
'- Tam Reitter, Lil.'f'MTWr"e comtril
thetic to developers' interests -
will agree to levy a fee large.
enough' to pay, for even the
scaled-down $150 million plan.,
"The computer models have
shown that traffic will get signifi-
cantly worse. . . over the ne.."Ct 20
years - it win get worse no mat-
ter what," Reitter said. "The plan
is already inadequate. You have a
plan that is inadequate and we're
not going to even do all of the
plan. .,
Reitter said that kind of short-
sightedness created the traffic
'nighonares. in Silicon Valley and
.Los Angeles. ..
.- '::'But others question why devel-
opers who build in the Tri-Valley
should bear the full burden when
a large percentage of the traffic is
corning from outside the area.
"Only 40 percent of the traffic
comes from the Tn-Valley," said
Dublin Mayor Guy Houston. So
it's unfair to load everything on
the new developments when real-
ly only 40 percent of the problem
is being generated from the area
itself. "
If the fee is too large, Houston
warned, it will chase businesses
and development Out to Manteca
and Tracy. The region will lose
economically and still get traffic ;
congestion.
Nonetheless, there is a consen- :
sus among elected officials that :
something must be done. ::
"Doing nothing is unaccea.:
able," Houston said. "We have
get the improvements done, ev .
if it's a small amount in some- f::
body's mind. It's better than do- f.!-
ing nothing." -{
Developers point out that they ~
are already paying a high price to ;
build their projects. Shapell In- :
dustries of Northern California
expects that existing fees will
add about $40,000 to prices of
the 5,800 homes it will build in
the Dougherty Valley east of San ,
Ramon. I
Property owners in north:
Pleasanton paid $30 million to I
build four new interchanges to:
service the giant Hacienda Busi-
ness Park.
Why isn't any money scheduled I
to be spent on 1-680'5 Sunol grade
- the second worst commute in I
the Bay Area? I
Houston said the corr~~or
wasn't a problem when the Jomt I
committee was started seven;
years ago - it's taken that long
to draft the proposal.
.
. 11
f'
i
1
F
l~
.'
i~
i:r
fL
f}~
f"
~'
t~-
,.,
t'-:
g,'
"
....
i:~-
1';'
~.
~
P -acts
:.. '",:~'9 J ::'< :.: .;C,,~ . :.
'cOst~less:
t"" '1'1: :::,.,::,: <'~'>.-">:'5~~.~:;;~I~":'
. .. ".' '".,:-1 . '.. .
00""'"9.'
.'. -::: :.:"'~"~:';'::.".:':':";':"i'l: '
prQpQsa X:
. .';........ ' ~"_.": ':,'. .... .~r~:. 0:< _: '! .:::: .~~.~ :.r~ ~..:~...
By Kari'HuIac' .' :;Y.d '. ~f:/tJ: Q7'
STAIT WllITER
.
. " .- .., .~ ". z" ~ ....... ..
. A' reg1~ ' ~orlat1on : !:o~ttee, agrri.4.
Monday to slash proposed, developer f~...t9
, Jump-start a politically S!?lled JOad lwpi u~e;m~t
. program., '" ,': ..,.,:.-.':,', '-','.' ',' :~. :_'~:"~'
,:1hat;.mc:ans' only about. $76'm1IlJOn 1n1t1ally
would beava1lable for $146 ml11ion In projects
. designed to ease traffic congestion. .
'. However. the fees would be revlewed every two
years anq could be; Increased - espedal1y if.they
didn't' have a negative impact on .devdopment.
sai/i Bill Van Gelder. Pleasanton tra1Dc. engineer
and 'member of. the ',Tn-Valley Transportation
CounctI's advisory committee. .
! ,. The . transportation counc:1l.. ;whlcb is com-
prised of elecled officials from five dUes and Ala:
meda and Contra Costa counties. will vote on the
committee's proposed resolution June 18. . ~...'
,. The resolution 'then has to get the OK oE Jodi-
,.Vidual city courictIs and governing bodies.: '. ,: ::. .'
Polltidans won't ,be voUng on spectfic:..road
projects. Theyll vote on a fee structure.: Exactly
how the money w1ll be spent will be dedded.later.
Commtttee member John D1l10n. who drafted
: the resolution..said the fee structure must be de-
cided nrst~~ . . '.
~rfwe donl move this forward. we are doomed'
to failure." Dl1Ion said. . .
," . Elei::ted' officta1s and the business commun1ty
'shot down .the transportation council's ,0r1g1ria1
proposal. which would have charged developers
$2.58Z,per:single-family home. Cr1tlcs called the
, fee structure inequitable and unfair.
" "We think it (is)' absolutely the wrong ap-
. proach. and if passed w1ll make our rtglon un-
competiUve. forcing more and more businesses
and residents over the hill." said a June 5 letter
to Tri-Valley Business Council members. .
. The-letter. from business counctI president
Steven Tanner. suggested a fee oC $170 per single-
famtlv residence. :. .' .
, But Bob McCleary.' executive director oC. the
Contra Costa Transportation Authority. said.that
wouldn't raise enough money at a time when fed-
. eral and state: transportation dollars are disap-
pearing.' . .
"Irs small pickings at the state and federal
leveL - McCleary s,aid. '
The committee is proposing a $1.500 fee per
single-family residence. :.. . .
Phlll1p Serna, an advocate for the Home
Builders Association. told the committee he sus-
pects the association w111 react positively.
..A maJonty of the builders would probably be
In favor of this. - Serna said.
Chris KinzeL a member of the Trl-Valley Busi-
ness Council. said the fees are ,"clearly In the
right d1rection." ,
The fees also apply to multifamily residences.
offices and retail and industrial buildings. :
Committee members debated whether or not
"
;.... .
t.
,.
~.
.
1n rut fhlll. "",~....l_..... 11_4- 1 L Ir