Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 AltamontLndfiOpenSpace CITY CLERK File # DGJ[ql[Q]-W1rnl AGENDA STATEMENT CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: August 3, 2004 SUBJECT: Report on Altamont Landfill & Resource Recovery Facility Open Space Advisory Committee Report by Diane Lowart, Parks & Community Services Director ATTACHMENTS: 1. Criteria for Use of Altamont Open Space Funds - Draft 2. Alameda County Altamont Landfill Open Space Fund Application for Funding - Draft RECOMMENDATION: ~.~ FINANCIAL STATEMENT: Provide input on draft criteria and application funding process None DESCRIPTION: One of the high priority City Council goals for Fiscal Year 2003- 2004 was "work with Alameda County Open Space Advisory Committee to establish open space acquisition priorities." Backeround of Oven Svace Fees As part of the settlement of litigation over the expansion of the Altamont Landfill, the parties to the litigation (Alameda County, Waste Management of Alameda County, the Cities of Livermore and Pleasanton, and various environmental groups) agreed that the County would charge Waste Management of Alameda County, Inc. (WMAC) two fees totaling $1.25 per ton of waste disposed at the Landfill, which WMAC is required to pass on to its franchisors and other jurisdictions that use the Landfill. Of the two fees, $0.75 per ton must be spent on acquisition of open space, either by purchasing the land or obtaining a permanent easement. Twenty percent of the total amount of money acquired through the fee will be spent in the Dublin-Pleasanton area, referred to in the settlement agreement as the western area; the other eighty percent must be used to acquire property in eastern Alameda County, around Livermore. How Decisions Reeardine Exvenditure of the Fees are Made Under the terms of the settlement agreement, the County must convene an Advisory Committee to make decisions about the expenditure of the funds in the account. The County, Livermore, Pleasanton, and the Sierra Club may appoint voting members to the Advisory Committee. Dublin has a non-voting representative. The Advisory Committee may request the assistance of representatives of park district, land trusts and interested constituencies such as the ranching community. The Advisory Committee will prepare a "priority list" of properties for acquisition in each of the two areas. It will also decide how to allocate funds derived from the fee for expenditure during each year. For the Dublin-Pleasanton area, the Advisory Committee takes action by majority vote of the members representing the County, Pleasanton, and the Sierra Club. Those three members decide which properties ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COPIES TO: Altamont Landfill & Resource Recovery Facility Open Space Advisory Committee C,\Dooumon'" ~d Settin""onip\Locol Sotting'ITompomJ I~~I"\OLK421" 8-3-04 "tmnont2~~M NO. M èJ in that area will appear on the priority list and how to spend the money allocated for expenditure on open space in that area. The Advisory Committee makes annual adjustments to the lists and the proposed expenditure of funds. The City has entered into two Agreements to guarantee that the interests of the City of Dublin are repre.sented when the allocation of funds is made. The first Agreement is with the City of Pleasant on and ensures that Pleasanton will use its vote on the Advisory Committee to assure that funds allocated for open space in the western area will be divided evenly between Dublin and Pleasanton. The second Agreement is with the County of Alameda and ensures that the County will use its 'vote in a similar fashion. Both votes are needed in order to secure a majority vote on the Advisory Committee. The key elements of the Agreements are as follows: Dublin agrees to: · Allow WMAC to take the open space fees into account in its calculation of target revenue and, thereby, to include the fees in customers' rates. · Continue to study mechanisms for funding open space acquisition and to share that information with the Advisory Committee. · Participate in the Advisory Committee and advocate for the division of funds as provided for in the Agreement. Pleasanton and Alameda County agree to: · Vote to put on the list of open space properties for the western area, properties in Dublin that Dublin has approved. · Vote to divide the funds allocated for the western area evenly between properties in Dublin and Pleasanton, unless the two cities agree to an alternate arrangement. · Vote to disapprove the Advisory Committee's recommendation if the Advisory Committee approves a list or allocation that does not conform to the Agreement between Dublin and Pleasanton and Dublin and the County. Status of Advisorv Committee The Altamont Landfill & Resource Recovery Facility Open Space Advisory Committee convened in November of 2002 and has met 13 times in the last 22 months. In addition to representatives from Alameda County, Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and the Sierra Club, the meetings are regularly attended by representatives from East Bay Regional Park District, Tri-Valley Conservancy, Agricultural Land Trust and other like organizations. However, there is rarely a quorum of voting members present which has hindered the Advisory Committees ability to achieve consensus on the issues before the Committee in a timely manner. For example, the Advisory Committee is charged with preparing a "priority list" of properties for acquisition in each of the two areas and deciding how to allocate funds derived from the fee for expenditure during each year. At this time the Advisory Committee has not developed a priority list of properties but instead has focused its efforts on. developing criteria for use of the funds and on the application process for distribution of the funds. The Advisory Committee would like to have an .open application process to determine the number and scope of projects that require funding and how they meet the Committees overall goals for preserving open space before a priority list is developed. Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the first priority is the acquisition of property having significant value for preservation of native biological diversity and/or wildlife habitat, and the second priority is to acquisition of property having significant value for visual character and/or non-motorized recreation. Attachment 1 is the Draft Criteria for Use of Altamont Open Space Funds that further defines ~ CJb3 the priorities. As proposed, all properties considered for expenditure of funds must meet some of the criteria listed in categories 1 or 2 with category I having a higher priority than category 2. Criteria in categories 3 - 5 will be used by the Advisory Committee to further evaluate and choose from among candidate properties. Attachment 2 is the Draft Application for Funding. The Advisory Committee proposes to use this application to solicit individual landowners, public agencies, private conservancies and other non-profit organizations to apply for funds. Applications will be accepted on a continuous basis. Processing time for applications will vary depending on completeness of the application, time needed to evaluate project benefits and funding availability. Every effort will be made for applications submitted by March 1 or September 1 to be evaluated within the ensuing six months. How well a given property meets the criteria established by the Advisory Committee, including the availability of sufficient funds to make the acquisition, will determine whether the property receives funds. At this time there is approximately $612,000 in funding available in the Dublin-Pleasanton area. One of the City of Dublin's 2004-2005 Strategic Goals is to "establish open space area in western hills." Objectives for accomplishing this goal are: I) work with EBRPD to complete negotiations for land acquisition in the western hills; and 2) identify and secure sources of funding for land acquisition in the western hills. Should the EBRPD and the City be successful in their negotiation of land acquisition in the western hills, the Altamont Open Space Fund could be one source of funding to acquire the land as the potential properties for acquisition would meet the draft criteria as proposed by the Advisory Committee. The City would, however, be required to submit an Application for Funding for consideration by the Advisory Committee. The Draft Criteria and Application for Funding have not yet been adopted by the Advisory Committee. Instead the Advisory Committee has suggested that each City review and comment on what is proposed. Therefore, it is the recommendation of Staff that the City Council receives the report and provides input on the Criteria for Use of Altamont Open Space Funds and the Application for Funding. 3~ , rJb I'D DRAFT· Criteria rcrUse cfAltamcntOpenSpace Funds DRAFT Under tenus of the Altamont Settlement agreement, all properties considered for expenditure of funds must meet some of the criteria listed in categories 1 or 2 below. Category 1 has higher priority than category 2. Criteria in categories 3 - 5 (i.e., those listed below the dotted line) will be used by the Committee to further evaluate and choose from among candidate properties. Other relevant terms of the Settlement agreement must also be satisfied. 1. Significant Native Biodiversity Value a. Are native flora or fauna present on the property? b. Are flora or fauna of special concern present? (e.g., biota listed on federal or -state endangered species lists or other comparable lists; species at the end of their natural range; unusual assemblages of species;.rare plant communities; etc.) c. Does the property contain important wildlife habitat or is it valuable for protecting nearby wildlife habitat, especially for species of special concern? (e.g., Is the property designated as critical habitat or does it serve to protect critical habitat; is it valuable for protecting hydrologic flows or watersheds on which native species depend?) d. Is the property a corridor thatlinks wildlife habitats? e. Is the quality of the habitat good for native species? (e.g., Is it relatively intact; should it be acquired for restoration purposes?) f. Is the habitat at risk from inappropriate (but permissible) uses if not protected? 2. Significant Visual and/or Non-motorized Recreational Value a. Is the property identified as a scenic resource in city or county general plans? b. Is the property identified as important for non-motorized recreation in city, county or park district plans? c. Is the property identified as an important acquisition target by trail users? .... ... .......... ........ ............ ...... ...... ......... ... ...... ...................... ..t .................. ... .................. ... ...... 3. Strategic Value in Land Protection a. Is the property at risk of development if not acquired or protected? b. Can acquisition of the property protect a larger area from development (e.g., by securing an urban growth boundary or an existing greenbelt)? c. Is the property contiguous to existing protected lands or does it link protected lands? d. Does the property fit into a long-term strategic plan for land protection in Alameda County? e. Does the property fit into a city's land protection goals? 4. Additional Funding Sources a. Are other agencies, conservancies, conservation organizations or jurisdictions interested in helping -protect the property? b. Are there other sources of funds to tap? ~"~"o'-l- ~,2-- ATTACHMENT 1 ~~\D c. Willcê01-1-aboration,on·aG'luisition,,()f-aparticular-p.fQpertyfQ~gerelatÍQoshi psthat-will be val uable for future acquisitions? 5. Willing Sellers a. Is the property currently on the market? b. Are the property owners willingto sell the land or willing to sell conservation easements? c. Have the owners expressed an interest in conservation values? d. Are the owners aware of the concept of conservation easements and the availability of funds for their purchase? e. What is the cost of the property compared to the benefit received? 3~1'þ DRAFT 5- 20-04 Alameda County Altamont Landfill Open Space Fund Application for Funding Funds for acquisition of open space lands in eastern Alameda County are available owing to a legal settlement in connection with expansion of the Altamont Landfill. Fees of approximately $1.25 million per year will be paid into the fund. The settlement stipulates that first priority for use of funds must be given to properties having significant value for preservation of native biological diversity and/or wildlife habitat. Second priority is given to properties having significant value for visual character and/or non-motorized recreation. The purchase of permanent conservation easements that meet these goals also is eligible for funding. Individual land owners, public agencies, private conservancies and other non-profit organizations may apply for funds. To be considered for funding, the property must lie within the territory established by the settlement agreement, generally to the east of the Pleasanton/Dublin ridge line (see map attached to this application). The Altamont Landfill Open Space Committee (ALOSC), composed of representatives from Alameda County, the City of Livermore, the City of Pleasant on, and the Sierra Club, decides which properties receive funding. How well a given property meets the criteria established by the committee, including the availability of sufficient funds to make the acquisition, will determine whether the property receives funds. Application Procedures: When to apply: The Altamont Landfill Open Space Committee will accept proposals on a continuous basis. Processing time for applications will vary depending on completeness of the application, time needed to evaluate project benefits and funding availability. Every effort will be made for applications submitted by March 1 or September 1 to be evaluated within the ensuing 6 months. Projects not funded in a particular cycle remain eligible for future funding. Applicants may reapply using existing forms if the information remains current. .. Applications should be sent to: Maria Palmeri Alameda County Planning Department 224 W. Winton Avenue, Room 111 Hayward, CA 94544 ATTACHMENT 2 Lf r5Q CD Review Process: The Altamont Landfill Open Space Committee meets on a regular basis. After an application has been submitted, the ALOSC will notify the applicant in writing whether or not the proposal is acceptable, incomplete, or not acceptable. All proposals will be evaluated with assistance from Alameda County staff. If a proposed project is acceptable and funding is available, a project summary will be prepared for the applicant and the proposal will be scheduled for consideration at a future ALOSC meeting. The applicant will be notified when his/her property is up for consideration. For more information, contact Maria Palmeri at the Alameda County Planning Department (510) 670-5421 or the address above. 2 Alameda County Altamont Landfill Open Space Fund Application for Grant Funding GRANTEE INFORMATION Name of Applicant Requesting Funding (Project Sponsor): Project Manager or Contact Person: Mailing Address: Telephone Number: ( ) Fax Number: ( ) E-mail Address: Is the Applicant a Non-profit or 501(c)(3) organization: Yes No Federal Tax Identification Number: LANDOWNER INFORMATION Name of Landowner: Mailing Address: Telephone Number: ( ) E-mail Address: Fax Number: ( ) PROJECT INFORMATION Project Title: Project Location: Jurisdiction in which property is located: Land use designation and zoning applicable to the property: Project Objective: Funding Requested: $ Total Project Cost (including in-kind contributions): $ Itemized Project Expenses, including transaction costs: (Include all project expenses; indicate those that would be paid for with Altamont funds.) 6~ it> 3 lodfJ I'D Itemized Expenses Requested funding with this proposal Funded by· another source (Identify the source) l. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Please Note: Additional requirements may be imposed as a condition for funding. Proposed funding date: Estimated completion date ofproject: Is the property currently under a Williamson Act contract? If yes, has a notice of non-renewal been filed? If yes, when does the contract expire? Yes Yes No No Are there other easements or deed restrictions on the property (e.g., conservation easements, access roads, utility lines, pipelines, etc.)? Are other easements currently being negotiated? Yes No If yes, please describe: Who will hold fee title to the land or hold the easement? Is that entity aware of this project? Yes No If yes, provide name and contact information of the appropriate representative: Signature of Applicant: Date: 4 1~ 10 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (Use additional sheets as necessary.) Thoroughly describe the full project and clearly indicate which portions are proposed for ALOSC funding. Describe how the project meets the ALOSC funding criteria (attached). Describe how the property will be operated and maintained (e.g., if donated to the East Bay Regional Park District, an agreement showing that EBRPD is willing to accept and maintain the property; if a conservation easement is proposed, indicate what the easement holder's monitoring plan is for the property.) , 6 g l1b I'D CRITERIA FOR SELECTION Applicant should describe how the property addresses each 'of the following criteria. Under terms of the Altamont Settlement agreement, properties selected for ftmding must meet some of the criteria in Categories 1 or 2. Criteria in categories 3 - 5 (below the dotted line) will be used by the Altamont Lanfill Open Space Committee to further evaluate and choose from among candidate properties. The criteria are not used quantitatively as a scoring system. Rather they help the committee to evaluate, rank or choose from among different candidate properties at a given point in time. A property that meets many ofthe following criteria would indicate a higher priority for ALOSC involvement. 1. Significant Native Biodiversity Value a. Are native flora or fauna present on the property? b. Are flora or fauna of special concern present? (e.g., biota listed on federal or state endangered species lists or other comparable lists; species at the end of their natural range; unusual assemblages of species; rare plant communities; etc.) c. Does the property contain important wildlife habitat or is it valuable for protecting nearby wildlife habitat, especially for species of special concern? (e.g., Is the property designated as critical habitat or does it serve to protect critical habitat; is it valuable for protecting hydrologic flows or watersheds on which native species depend?) d. Is the property a corridor that links wildlife habitats? e. Is the quality of the habitat good for native species? (e.g., Is it relatively intact; should it be acquired for restoration purposes?) f. Is the habitat at risk from inappropriate (but permissible) uses if not protected? 2. Significant Visual and/or Non-motorized Recreational Value a. Is the property identified as a scenic resource in city or county general plans? b. Is the property identified as important for non-motorized recreation in city, county or park district plans? c. Is the property identified as an important acquisition target by trail users? ..........................,.......................................................................................,......... 3. Strategic Value in Land Protection 1. Is the property at risk of development if not acquired or protected? 2. Can acquisition of the property protect a larger area from development (e.g., by securing an urban growth boundary or an existing greenbelt)? 3. Is the property contiguous to existing protected lands or does it link protected lands? 4. Does the property fit into a long-term strategic plan for land protection in Alameda County? 5. Does the property fit into a city's land protection goals? 4. Additional Funding Sources I. Are other agencies, conservancies, conservation organizations or jurisdictions interested in helping protect the property? 2. Are there other sources of funds to tap? 3. Will collaboration on acquisition of a particular property forge relationships that will be valuable for future acquisitions? 7 cq '-b I'D 5. Willing Sellers 1. Is the property currently on the market? 2. Are the property owners willing to sell the land or willing to sell conservation easements? 3. Have the owners expressed an interest in conservation values? 4. Are the owners aware of the concept of conservation easements and the availàbility of funds for their purchase? 5. What is the cost of the property compared to the benefit received? 8 ID -fbCD REQUIRED ATTACHMENTS Complete applications must contain the following attachments to facilitate review of the grant request. 1. Property location map (regional and site specific). 2. A detailed map that displays the following information: a. the exterior boundaries ofthe entire property with parcel numbers of the property proposed for acquisition or easement b. adjacent parcels with their parcel numbers and names and mailing addresses of parcel owners c. the total number of acres ofthe entire property and if applicable the number of acres and location on the property subject to the terms and conditions of any proposed conservation easement d. regional landscape features or habitat areas of importance in relation to the property 4. Six, 4 x 6-inch representative, color photographs of the property. 5. A copy of any proposed easement for the property. 6. A description of any known existing environmental hazards on the property. 7. A statement that the Applicant has conducted due diligence to determine that all applicable environmental laws and regulations are being followed. NOTE: A real estate appraisal for the property or easement is not required to be submitted with the initial application. However, an appraisal and title search may be required during the review process at applicant's expense. 9