HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.5 ABAG CompSubregionlPlan (2)
.. ~.,.'
.
.
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMEr-:':T
City Council Meeting Date: February 13, 1995
SUBJECT:
Report on the ABAG Comprehensive Subregional Planning
Pilot Project
REPORT PREPARED BY: Laurence L. Tong, Planning Director
Carol Cirelli, Senior Planner
EXHIBITS ATTACHED: / Exhibit A: Resolution adopting the Memorandum of
Understanding (with draft MOU attached)
/ Attachment 1: Resolution 118-94 Supporting the Tri- Valley
Planning Committee
/ Attachment 2: January 11, 1995, Memorandum to Tri-
Valley Planning Committee from Millie
Greenberg
/ Attachment 3: November j 4, 1994 City Council Agenda
Statement (w/o attachments)
Attachment 4: Tri-Valley Planning Council Grant Proposal
(under separate r.oVf'!r).
Attachment 5: ABAG Menu of Subregional Land Use
Policies (under separate cover).
RECOMMENDA~
Jr\
Consider and provide direction on the extent of City
particip,ation, including:
1. appointment of a representative and an alternate
2. amount of staff participation
3. revisions to the draft MOU
4. adoption of the resolution adopting the MOU
5. input on the menu of subregional land use policies
..
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: The preparation of the draft subregional strategy may
require at least 4 hours/week of staff time for the 6 month
duration of the grant, totaling approximately 100 hours.
Participation in this project will delay other Council
authorized projects, incluciing, but not limited to: Eastern
Dublin implementation measures including scenic corridor
policies, stream corridor restoration, inclusionary housing
ordinance, school impact mitigation, sewer, water,
transportation, and fiscal matters; Schaefer Ranch General
Plan Amendment, Prezoning, Annexation, and
Development Agreement Study; Outdoor Sales Ordinance;
and potential Eastern Dublin Detailed Planned
Development Rezoning(s).
BACKGROUND:
The Tri-Valley Council formed the Ad Hoc Subregional Planning Committee (the
Tri- Valley Planning Committee) on October 20, 1994 to consider submitting a proposal
to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) for the Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Pilot Project (project) grant.
CITY CLERK
1 FILE ~
.~~~~-~~~-~~-~----------------------------------------------------~~~i~~-~~~-~~~~~~-~I-~~
. J
.
.
On November 14, 1994, the City Council considered the Project and adopted a
revised draft resolution [see Attachment 1] supporting the Tri-Valley Council
Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee. The City Council committed to
participate in only applying for the grant at that time.
The Tri-Valley Planning Committee submitted it's proposal to ABAG on
November 29, 1994 [see Attachment 4]. Millie Greenberg, Mayor of Danville, and
Cathie Brown, Mayor of Livermore, represented the Tri-Valley Planning Committee at
the ABAG Regional Planning Committee selection subcommittee interview [see
Attachment 2].
On January 9, 1995, the Executive Board of the ABAG awarded the Project grant
of $55,000 plus staff assistance to the member jurisdictions of the Tri- Valley Council.
On January 30, 1995, at the Tri-Valley Planning Committee meeting, Millie
Greenberg asked that the councilslboards consider adopting the draft Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) [see Exhibit A], and also asked the Councils/Boards to appoint a
representative and an alternate. Gary Binger, ABAG staff, requested the representatives
to consider, at hislher option, completing the ABAG Menu of Subregional Land Use
Policies [see Attachment 5] by February 20, 1995.
On February 1, 1995, at the Tri-Valley Council meeting, Millie Greenberg
reported that the Tri-Valley Planning Committee was awarded the ABAG grant. She
reiterated her request for adopting the MOU and appointing a representative and an
alternate to the Tri-Valley Planning Committee.
Request for Proposals were sent on January 30, 1995, to potential consultants for
preparing the subregional strategy. Consultant proposals are due on February 13, 1995.
The technical advisory committee is scheduled to discuss the proposals received on
February 17, 1995 and the Tri-Valley Planning Committee is scheduled to meet to select
the consultant on February 27, 1995.
COMPREHENSIVE SUBREGIONAL PLANNING PILOT PROJECT:
..
The purpose of the Project is to: 1) demonstrate coordinated. multi-jurjsdictional
local planning (at a subregional level) to achieve region-wide goals and objectives; and 2)
produce a draft subregional strate~ comprised primarily of model goals, objectives, and
policy language for potential inclusion in the general plans and related policy documents
of the participating jurisdictions.
The draft subregional strategy will consist of two documents, the "Draft Tri-
Valley Subregional Planning Strategy" and the "Technical Supplement", which includes
the background information used to develop the subregional strategy.
The draft subregional strategy Will address the following land use policy issues:
1. Location and intensity of urban development
2. Natural resource protection and management
3. Mobility
4. Housing supply and affordability
5. Economic Vitality
The draft subregional strategy will be guided by and achieve reasonable
consistency with the following regionally adopted ABAG goals:
2
..
. t
,
.
.
1. A pattern of compact~ city-centered growth in the urban areas of the San
Francisco Bay Area, with a balance of land used guided into or around
existing communities in order to preserve surrounding open space and
agricultural land, as well as environmentally sensitive areas.
2. Growth directed to where infrastructure capacity is available or committed
including, but not limited to, freeway, transit, water, solid waste disposal
and sewage treatment, and where natural resources will not be
overburdened, and discourage urban growth in unincorporated areas.
3. Development patterns and policies that discouraie loni distance~ sinile-
occQpant automobile commutini and increase resident access to
employment, shopping and recreation by transit or other non-auto means.
4. Firm urban growth boundarie~, with streamlined procedures that permit and
direct development within these boundaries.
5. Increased housing srtPply, with a range of types and affordability and a
suitable living environment to accommodate current and future workers
and households.
6. Long-term protection and enhancement of agricultural. land. ecologically
sensitive areas and opel) space, and of other irreplaceable natural resources
necessary to the health, economy and well-being of present and future
generations, and to the sustainable ecology of the region.
7. Economic develo-pment which provides jobs for current and future
residents, increases the tax base, supports and enhances California's
position in the global marketplace, and helps provide the resources
necessary to meet vital environmental, housing, transportation and other
needs.
The entire Project is scheduled to be completed by the end of July, 1995.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING:
..
The purpose of the MOU is to formalize the organizational framework for
implementing the Project. A draft MOU [attached to Exhibit A] has been prepared for
consideration by each Tri-Valley jurisdiction. This draft MOU would need to be
executed by and between the member jurisdictions of the Tri-Valley Council.
The draft MOU will also serve to establish the responsible party for financial
oversight of funds expended in conjunction with the Project. The City of San Ramon has
offered to perform this function.
The MOU states that the public agencies entering into the MOU do not intend to
create an agency or entity separate from those public agencies.
The draft MOU suggests that the name of the Tri-Valley Council Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Committee (the Tri-Valley Planning Committee) be changed to the
"Tri-Valley Planning Council".
3
. ,
i
.
.
The draft MOU would delegate Project administration to the Tri-Valley Planning
Council (planning Council). The Planning Council would be comprised of one elected
member of each member jurisdiction of the Tri- Valley Council. The representatives
would be appointed and serve at the pleasure of their respective board or council. The
Planning Council members would have the responsibility to report to their respective
board or council on a routine basis to keep them informed of the progress and to receive
input. Each Planning Council member would have equal voting privileges. However,
members would be directed by the draft MOU to attempt to reach consensus following
full discussion.
The Planning Council would be authorized and directed to perform all acts
necessary or desirable to execute and administer the draft MOU, including, but not
limited to, 1) selecting and retaining a consultant to prepare the draft subregional strategy;
2) authorizing, evaluating and monitoring the expense of preparation of the strategy; and
3) other actions consistent with the draft MOU.
The draft MOU also establishes a technical advisory committee made up of one
staff member from each member jurisdiction, with one staff member serving as
chairperson.
POTENTIAL CONCERNS WITH DRAFT MOU:
1. Voting
At the Tri-Valley Planning Committee meeting on January 30, 1995, Cm.
Moffatt raised concerns regarding the voting provisions in the draft MOU. The draft
MOU provides that voting shall be by simple majority of those representatives present,
with a quorum of four members required. Three representatives could potentially take
action on the Project.
The City Council may want to request that the adoption of the draft subregional
strategy be by unanimous vote of all representatives. This may help ensure that each
agency's concerns are adequately addressed.
..
2. Name of the body prtWaring the draft subregional strategies:
The draft MOU suggests that the body responsible for preparing the draft
subregional strategy be named the "Tri- V alley Planning Council". Such a name may
create the public perception that the body would be semi-autonomous and independent of
the Tri-Valley Council member agencies. That perception would be contrary to the stated
purpose of the MOU. The Tri-Valley Council member agencies do not intend to create
another agency or separate entity.
The City Council may want to request that the body be named the "Tri-Valley
Planning Committee". Such a name may better meet the purpose of the MOU. It may
help clarify the role of the body as subordinate to and dependent on the Tri- Valley
Council member agencies. The Tri-Valley Council originally formed the Ad Hoc
Subregional Planning Committee. The resolution previously adopted by the City Council
supported a Tri-Valley Planning Committee [see Attachment 1 ].
ABAG MENU OF SUBREGIONAL LAND USE POLICIES
ABAG has prepared a menu of 129 subregional land use policies for local agency
consideration. The menu has a checklist for the local agency to indicate its level of
commitment to the individual policy: (support/would consider/don't support/ not
applicable). The menu does not discuss the local implications of the commitment.
4
. .
.
.
As part of this Project, the ABAG staffhas asked each agency representative to
consider, at hislher option, completing the menu checklist.
If the City Council decides to participate in the Project, the City Council may
want to provide direction to its representative, alternate, and Staff on how to provide
input on the menu.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction regarding to what extent
the City should participate in the Project. If full participation is desired, Staff
recommends that the City Council:
1. appoint a representative and an alternate
2. provide direction regarding the amount of Staff participation (such as
approximately 4 hours/week to a maximum of approximately 1 00 hours).
3. provide direction regarding any necessary revisions to the draft MOU
4. adopt the Resolution adopting the MOU with any necessary revisions
5. provide direction regarding input on the menu of subregional land use
policies.
..
(g:\agendas\2-13ccsr)
5
,,,-
\,
"
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. - 95
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ADOPTING A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BY AND AMONG THE
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COST A,
TOWN OF DANVILLE AND CITIES OF DUBLIN, LIVERMORE,
PLEASANTON AND SAN RAMON
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council composed of the Town of Danville, the
Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon, and the Counties of Alameda
and Contra Costa was created in 1984; and
WHEREAS, the Tri- Valley Council was formed to address issues of regional
concern; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has a proven record of supporting
subregional cooperation; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has formed the Tri-Valley Council
Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee (the Tri-Valley Planning Committee) to
further subregional cooperation and the development of a draft subregional strategy; and
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments has awarded a $55,000
one-time grant to assist in development of the Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot
Project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the monetary grant from ABAG will be supplemented by the
equivalent of one full time equivalent of technical assistance and project support from
ABAG for a period of up to six months and by limited, additional technical support from
the Bay Area Air Quality Control Management District; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Project is two-fold: 1) to demonstrate
coordinated, multi-jurisdictional local planning (at a sabregionallevel) to achieve region-
wide goals and objectives; and 2) to produce a draft subregional strategy ("Strategy")
comprised primarily of model goals, objectives, and policy language for potential
inclusion in the general plans and related policy documents of the participating
jurisdictions; and
1
ExhM... A
".
.
.
WHEREAS, the Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU"), attached as
Exhibit 1, establishes that the administration of the Project is delegated to and vested in
the "Tri-Valley Planning ( )" (hereinafter referred to as "Planning
( )"); and
WHEREAS, the MOU establishes the make-up and voting framework of the
Planning ( ); and
WHEREAS, the MOU authorizes and directs the Planning ( ) to
perform all acts necessary or desirable to execute and administer this MOU including, but
not limited to: selecting and retaining a consultant to prepare the Strategy; authorizing,
evaluating and monitoring the expense of preparation of the Strategy; and other actions
consistent with this MOU; and
WHEREAS, by entering into this MOU, the Parties do not intend to create an
agency or entity separate from the parties to the MOU.
\,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Dublin hereby approves the Memorandum of Understanding by and among the Boards of
Supervisors for the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa and the Councils of Danville,
Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton and San Ramon and authorizes the Mayor of the City of
Dublin to sign the Memorandum of Understanding with the following stipulations:
1. Name of the body preparing the draft subregional strategy: The name
"Tri-Valley Planning Committee" shall be used instead of "Tri-Valley Planning Council".
2. Voting: The following language shall be added to Section 9 - "Adoption of
the Draft Tri- Valley Subregional Planning Strategy shall be by unanimous vote of all
representatives. "
Passed, Approved, and Adopted this
day of
, 1995.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
2
. NOTE. ~ ~ IIJD1CAW P()1lSl'SrIJ\L ~VlSIOI'JS
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BY AND AMONG THE COUNTY OF AlAMEDA, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,
TOWN OF DANVILLE AND THE CITIES OF DUBUN, UVERMORE,
PLEASANTON AND SAN RAMON
Revised Draft - February 3, 1995
1. Parties. This Memorandum of Understanding (hereafter referred to as "MOU"),
dated February 15, 1995, for reference only, is entered into by and among the following
public agencies: the County of Alameda, the County of Contra Costa, the Town of
Danville, the City of Dublin, the City of Livermore, the City of Pleasanton and the City of
San Ramon (collectively hereafter referred to as "Parties" or "Party").
2. Recitals. Each Party to this MOU is a public agency duly authorized and existing
under the law of the State of California. The County of Contra Costa, . the Town of
Danville and the City of San Ramon are situated within the boundaries of the County of
Contra Costa. The County of Alameda, the City of Dublin, the City of Livermore and the
City of Pleasanton are situated within the boundaries of the County of Alameda.
The area commonly known as the "Tri-Valley Area" encompasses the Town of
Danville, the Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton and San Ramon and portions of the
Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa immediately adjacent to the cities and town.
\,
The parties hereto recognize that coordination of planning efforts in the Tri-Valley
Area is to the benefit of all parties hereto and their constituents.
3. Purpose. The purpose of this MOU is to provide a framework for oversight of
efforts associated with the Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Project in the Tri-
Valley area (hereafter referred to as "Project"). The purpose of the Project is two-fold: 1)
to demonstrate coordinated, multi-jurisdictional local planning (at a subregional level) to
achieve region-wide goals and objectives; and 2) to produce a draft subregional strategy
comprised primarily of model goals, objectives, and policy language for potential
inclusion in the general plans and related policy documents of the participating
jurisdictions. The draft subregional strategy will consist of two documents, the "Draft Tri-
Valley Subregional Planning Strategy" (hereafter referred to as "Strategy") and the
"Technical Supplement" (which includes the background information used to develop the
Strategy). The MOU also serves to establish the responsible Party for financial oversight
of funds expended in conjunction with the development of the referenced documents.
By entering into this MOU, the Parties do not intend to create an agency or entity separate
from the Parties to the MOU and no provision of this MOU should be so construed.
Page 1 of 6
ruhIWI J
UI'" ~-y.
.
"tt '7
(!Wl~ e,e .
.
4. Tri-Valle Plannin Council. The administration of the activities called for in this
MOU is delegated t d v st ill the "Tri-Valle Plannin~(hereafter referred
to as "Planning Council'. The Planning Council shall be comprised of one elected
member of the boar of supervisors and city or town council of the respective Parties to
the MOU, to be appointed and serve at the pleasure of the res e 've board or council.
The board of supervisor members appointed to the Plannin ounci hall e c have the
option of designating an appointee to serve on their behalf on e P anin ounci These
appointees shall have full voting privileges. Plannin ('(ouncil embers shall have the
responsibility to report to their respec~ve board or councll on ~e basis to keep
them informed of pro ress and to receive input for the Plannin~ Each member
of the Planning 0 n i shall have equal voting privileges, however, members shall
attempt ~consensus following full discussion. Upon t e . itial meeting of the
Plannin~one member shall be elected by the Plannin Council embers to serve
as chairperson and one person shall be elected to serve as vice-c airperson. Each Party
may appoint an alternate who may vote in the absence of the designated voting member.
The Plannin~s authorized and directed, on behalf of all Parties, to perform
all acts necessary or desirable to execute and administer this MOU including, but not
limited to: selecting and retaining a consultant to prepare the Strategy; authorizing,
evaluating and monitoring the expense of preparation of the Strategy; and other actions
consistent with this MOU.
\,
5. Draft Tri-Valley Subregional Planning Strategy. The Draft Tri-Valley Subregional
Plann' Strategy ("Strategy") shall be prepared by a consultant selected by the Planning
ouncil. The work plan to develop the Strategy, the corresponding time table to
accomplish the work, and the description of the work product shall be as substantially as
depicted in the grant proposal submitted to ABAG on November 29, 1994.
6. Administrative Services. There shall bttechnical advisory committee (hereafter
referred to as "TAC"), made up of one staff member from each Party, with one staff
member serving as chairperson. It shall be the responsibility of the chair erson of the
TAC to provide administrative services ecessary to the Plannin ounci such as
preparation of agendas for Plannin ouncil nd TAC meetings. The chairperson shall
rotate among the parties. The City of an amon shall receive the grant funds from ABAG
for the Project. Representatives of special districts and other agencies operating in the Tri-
Valley area will participate as "ex-officio" members of the TAC. Members of community
organizations and the public will be welcomed to attend meetings of the TAC.
7. Contract Administration. The City of San Ramon shall serve as Contract
Administrator and' shall be responsible for administering the consultant services utilized
in conjunction with this U The Contract Administrator shall prepare regular written
reports to the Plannin Council, AG and the TAC on the status of consultant services.
Page 2 of 6
.
.
8. Accounting Services. The Finance Director of the City of San Ramon shaH providc
accounting services for aH payments and receipts required by the terms ofthis MOU, and
shaH be responsible for the safekeeping of all funds by or to the Parties to this MOU.
9. Vote Required. The seven Plannin~embers shall have equal voting
privileges. Voting shaH be by majority of th~entatives present, with a quorum
of four members required. Members shaH attempt to reach consensus foHowing full
discussion.
10. Amendment. This MOU may be amended at any time upon the written approval
of all Parties to the MOU.
11. Notices. Any notices to be sent to any Party shall be directed to the office of thc
city manager or county administrator of the Party, with c.opies to all other city managcrs
and county administrators and the respective TAC members representing each Party.
12. Termination of MOU. This MOU shall terminate upon the occurrence of any of
the following conditions:
\,
a. Ninety days after subm~e Draft Tri-VaHey Subregional, Planning
Strategy by the Plannin~to the Tri-VaHey Council - unless by
unanimous decision of all ~~xpressed through action by the Tri-
Valley Council) the Plannin~s charged with responsibilities related
to implementation of the Strategy. .
b. Mutual written agreement by all Parties hereto.
13. Withdrawal ofIndividual Party(ies). With ninety days' prior written notice oftheir
intent to withdrawal from the Project, any Party(ies) shaH have the right to withdraw from
the process. Except as may otherwise be provided for in Section 12 above, withdrawal
of any Party(ies) from the process shall not cause termination of the provisions of this
MOU.
Page 3 of 6
.
.
14. Disposition of Funds Upon Termination. Any unexpended ABAG gram funds
remaining with the Finance Director of the City of San Ramon shall be returned to ABAG
upon termination of this MOU.
15. Effective Date. This MOU shall become effective upon the date of execution of
the last signatory hereto.
COUNlY OF ALAMEDA
Dated:
Gail Steele, Chairman
Approved as to Form:
Attest:
County Counsel
COUNlY OF CONTRA COSTA
Dated:
\,
Gayle Bishop, Chairman
Approved as to Form:
Atcest:
County Counsel
TOWN OF DANVItLE
Dated:
Millie Greenberg, Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest:
City Attorney
City Clerk
(signatures continued on next page)
Page 4 of 6
.
.
CIlY OF DUBUN
Dated:
Guy S. Houston, Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest:
City Clerk
City Attorney
CITY OF LIVERMORE
Dated:
Cathie Brown, Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest:
...
City Attorney
City Clerk
CIlY OF PLEASANTON
Dated:
Ben C. Tarver, Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest:
City Attorney
City Clerk
(signatures continued on next page)
Page 5 of 6
Dated:
.
.
CITY OF SAN RAMON
Greg Carr, Mayor
Approved as to Form:
Attest:
City Attorney
City Clerk
Page 6 of 6
.
.
RESOLUTION NO. 118 - 94
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE TRI-VALLEY COUNCIL
COMPREHENSIVE SUBREGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council composed of the Town of Danville,
the Cities of DUblin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon, and the
counties of Alameda and Contra Costa was created in 1984; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council was formed to address issues of
regional concern; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley council has a proven record of supporting
subregional cooperation as evidenced by the efforts of the Tri-Valley
Transportation council; and
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area G~vernments has issued a
request for proposals for the comprehensive subregional Planning pilot
Program to develop a draft subregional strategy of model goals,
objectives and policies for inclusion in local general plans; and
..
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has formed the .Tri-Valley Council
Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee to further subregional,
cooperation and the development of a draft subregional strategy.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the city Council that the city
of Dublin hereby supports the application to the Association of Bay
Area Governments for a grant to assist in development of a Tri-Valley
Comprehensive subregional Planning pilot Program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city of Dublin supports the Tri-
Valley Council's establishment of the Tri-Valley Council Comprehensive
subregional Planning committee to prepare and submit the grant
application and to develop the subsequent draft subregional strategy.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city of Dublin agrees to
participate in the preparation of the draft subregional strategy.
On the motion by Councilmember Moffatt, seconded by councilmember
Houston, the foregoing resolution was adopted at.the city Council
Meeting of November 14, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Councilmembers Houston, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder
Councilmember Burton
None
~.~.
Mayor
ATTACHMENT ,
~c
frri- Valley C · .1
ounCl
Counties of: Alameda Contra Costa
Cities of: Danville San Ramon Dublin Livermore Pleasant on
MEMORANDUM
January 11, 1995
. To:
From:
Subject:
Tri Valley Planning Committee
Millie Greenberg
ABAG Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Project
ABAG received six proposals for the Pilot Project grant. The subregions submitting
proposals were:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
San Mateo County Cities and County Association of Governments
Santa Clara County CMA
Solano County Economic Development Corporation
Sonoma County
Tri Valley 'Planning Council
Western Santa Clara County Foothills (Cities of Cupertino, Monte Sereno,
Saratoga, Town of Los Gatos, County of Santa Clara)
Subsequently, Santa Clara CMA withdrew due to staffing changes.
The proposals were first reviewed by ABAG staff, then a joint pallel that included
BAAQMD and MTC staff. Their comments were forwarded to an ABAG Regional
Planning Committee selection subcommittee comprised of Paul Battisti, Chair (Napa
County Supervisor) Linda Perry, Vice Chair (San Leandro Councilmember) Stanya Hearns
(League of Women Voters) and Gary Binger and Ceil Scandone (ABAG staff).
On January 5 the selection committee interviewed the applicants. Cathie Brown and I
represented the Tri Valley. The interview went very well. The committee was
knowledgeable, interested, and positive, and asked many probing questions.
At this time it appears their recommendation will be favorable to our proposal, and they
will forward their selection to the ABAGExecutive Board for action on January 19.
We will be meeting Monday, January 30, 7:30 A.M., Dublin City Offices Regional Room
to begin work.
Happy New Year!
ATTACHMENT 1.
I .J
12.':l Main Sfroppf. Plp"c-".,.,fn.,., r.A OA,i':~
, ;,
. ,
\,
/
.~
CITY OF DUBLIN
AGENDA STATEMENT
'i
-'
.
CITY COUNCil. MEETING DATE: NOVEMBER 14, 1994
SUBJECT:
ABAG Comprehenslv', .')ubregional Planning Pilot Project
L~urence Tong, Pl2.Jning Director !:r
Exhibit A: ABAG Request for Proposals: Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Pilot Project
REPORT PREPARED BY:
EXHIBITS ATTACHED:
Exhibit B: Cover Memorandum and Revised Draft
Resolution of Commitment
Exhibit C: ABAG Menu of Subregional Land Use Policies
RECOMMENDATION:
1) Discuss and consider
FINANCIAL STATEMENT:
,(J >v~
't,
Unknown impact on City staff, however there are few staff
resources available to support the effort given projects currently
authorized by the City Council. ABAG would provide:
1) 1 full time equivalent staff and consultant for up to 6 months.
2) $20,000 to the lead agency for staff time and expenses.
3) $35,000 to other participating agencies for staff time and
expenses.
DESCRIPTION:
ABAG (the Association of BIlY Area Govemments) has released a request for proposals for a
comprehensive subregional planning pilot pr'Jject (see Exhibit A)
The overall purpose of the pilot prJJect Is to demonstrate coordi!'lated, multi-jurisdictional local planning
(at a subregional level) to achieve re:g:on wide goals and objectives. 'The project would produce 1) a process for
reviewing ABAG's Menu of Subregional Land Use Policies (see Exhibit C) and selecting appropriate policies and
2) a draft subregional strategy with model goals, objectives and policy language for potential Inclusion in local
general plans.
The request Invites Bay Area cities and counties to submit proposals and a statement of commitment.
The Trl-Vailey Council has created an ad hoc committee to consider submitting a proposal by the deadline of
November 30, 1994. The committee has prepared a draft resolution of commitment. Staff members from the
Tri-Valley cities are also preparing a draft scope of work for considerallon by the committee. The project Is to be
completed within six (6) months of awarding. The estimated time frame Is from January 1995 to June 1995.
Staff recommends the City Council discuss and consider participating in the project, including the staff
resources available. Should the City Council decide to participate, the City Council should adopt the draft
resolution as revised (see Exhibit B).
ITEM NO.
COPIES TO: Agenda File
1
,
~
~
.\
'(
1
l
I
~
r
,J
~
I
~ . ATTACHMENT
------------------------------~~;~;;-;~~-~-------------------------
ITEM NO. 8..1
CI~
FILE ~~
f
I.
;,
I'
;'
3
:r
,\'.
~
)'
r.
t
I
.
~c
Tri- Valley
Council
..
.'
's of: Danville San Ramon Dublin Livermore Pleasanton
Counties of: Alameda Contra Costa
November 29, 1994
Mr. Gary Binger
Planning Director
Association of Bay Area Governments
P.O. Box 2050
Oakland, CA 94604-2050
Dear Mr. Binger:
The Tri. Valley Planning Council is pleased to submit this proposal for the comprehensive
subregional planning pilot program.
'.
The Tri-Valley area of eastern Alameda and southern Contra Costa Counties is unique. The
San Ramon, Amador and Livennore Valleys converge at the 'crossroads of Highways 580
and 680. Historically these north/south and east/west corridors served native American and
later Mexican trade routes. With the gold rosh, 4gers traveled through the valleys to and
from San Francisco. Eventually, the transcontinental railroad and freeways too followed this
route.
'\
As unique as the Tri-Valley is historically, it is also unique both geographically and
politically. Although there are five thriving cities within two ~ounties in the region, there
are tliousands of acres of open spa~e, a land trust and substantial open space corridors.
There are two major business parks within the Tri-Valley (Bishop Ranch and Hacienda),
BART is on the way and locally generated traffic mixes with streams from the Central
Valley. All of the, jurisdictions are committed to working together and have a decad~long
track record of accomplishments. Representatives of Special Districts and the business
community have joined the effort.
We are optimistic that subregional planning can be a reality in the Tri-Valley area. It will
not be simple/but with creativity, knowledge and your grant W~ can be a successful model.
Sincerely,
~,~.
"
Millie Greenberg .,.~",
Chair, Tri- Valley Planning Council
ATTACHMENT q
.,..,., 71"...:_ ("1..._......... "Y_ _~...._.,....... ,.., A n ,4r-,.'
.
TRI-VALLEY PLANNING COUNCIL
Proposal Submittal
'\
Association of Bay Area Governments
Comprehensive Subregional Planning
Pilot Project
:,;.
",~.." .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. 'WORK ,PROGRAM AND TIME TABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. I
II. RESOLUTIONS OF COMMITMENT . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
III. LETIERS OF SUPPORT . . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .'. . . . . . 21
IV. ST APPING AND RESOURCES ................ '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
V. HISTORY AND BACKGROUND ............................. 29
-.
'\
.:
'.~;' .
I. WORK PROGRAM AND TIME TABLE
The following work program and time table are proposed for undertaking the Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Pilot Project in the Tri- Valley area. This information is intended to satisfy,
requirements 1, 3, 6 and 7 of the ABAG grant submittal guidelines. The overall program
consists of: (1) description of the purpose of the project; (2) description of the anticipated
I
planning organizational framework; (3) interim work plan; and (4) project work plan with time
table.
A. PURPOSE OF PROJECT
.
The purpose of the project is twofold: 1) to demonstrate coordinated, multi-jurisdictional local
planning (at a subregional level) to achieve region-wide goals and objectives; and 2) to produce
a draft subregional strategy comprised primarily of model goals, objectives, and policy language
for potential inclusion in the general plans and related policy documents of the participating
jurisdictions. The planning process for developing the strategy is expected to be as important
as the final product. The process is intended to create a planning environment whereby each
participating jurisdiction respects the views of others while addressing planning issues of
common concern. Although subregional planning in the Tri- Valley area, and throughout the
entire Bay Area, has historically been somewhat fragmented and difficult to achieve, we are
deeply committed to making this process a success. . It is our goal to jointly achieve more ..
effective solutions to key subregional planning problems', such as the location and intensity of
urban development, economic stagnation, loss of agricultural and open space lands, traffic
congestion, housing affordability, and other pressing problems that transcend the boundaries of
the individual jurisdictions of the Tri-Valley area (Figure 1).
"
In conducting the project, our efforts will be guided by and achieve r~$9nable consistency with
- ~...............---------
the following regionally-adopted goals prescribed by ABAG:
1. A pattern of compact, city-centered growth in the urban areas of the San
Francisco Bay Area, with a balance of land uses guided into or around existing
communities in order to preserve surrounding open space and agricultural land,
as well as environmentally sensitive areas.
2. Growth directed to where infrastructure capacity is available or committed
including, but not limited to, freeway, transit, water, solid waste disposal, and
sewage treatment, and where natural resources will not be overburdened, and
discourage urban growth in unincorporated areas.
3.
Development patterns and policies thm discourage long distance, single-occupant
automobile commuting and increase resident access to employment, shopping, and
recreation by transit or other non-auto means.
'.r...'"
.;
I
4. Finn urban growth boundaries, with streamlined procedures that penn it and
direct development within these boundaries.
5. Increased housing supply, with a range ofrypes and affordabiliry and a suitable
living environment to accommodate current and future workers and households.
6. Long.tenn prO/ection and enhancement of agricultural land, ecologically sensitive
areas, and open space, and of other irreplaceable natural resources necessary /0 '
the health, economy, and well-being of present andfuture generations, and /0 the
sustainable ecology of the region.
7. Economic development which provides jobs for current and future residents,
increases the tax base, supports and enhances California's position in the global
marketplace, and helps provide the resources necessary to meet vital
environmental, housing, transportation, and other needs.
B. ORGANIZA TlONAL FRAMEWORK
''"'
Tri-Vallev Council. The current grant proposal was initiated by the Tri-Valley Council. The
Council consists of elected officials from the cities of Danville, Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton,
and San Ramon, and the counties of Alameda and Contra Costa. It was established in 1984 .
primarily to facilitate interjurisdictional communication on issues of subregional concern in the.
Tri.Valleyarea. (Refer to Section VI for the history and background of the Tri.Valley and the
Tri- Valley Council.)
'\
The Council recently established the Tri-Valley Planning Council to prepare and submit the
current grant proposal, and manage the project if selected.
Tri-Vallev' Plannin!! Council. The Tri.Valley Planning Council consists of one elec~ed
representative from each of the participating five cities and two counties. The seven Planning
Council members have equal voting privileges. Voting shall be by majority of those
representatives present with a quorom of four members required. However, members would
attempt to reach consensus following full discussion. Planning Council members are encouraged
to report to their respective Council/Board on a routine basis to keep them informed of progress
and to receive input for the Planning Council.
Representatives from special districts and agencies operating in the Tri- Valley area are
encouraged to join the Planning Council on an "ex-officio" basis, and participate in all
discussions. These special districts and agencies would include schools, parks, fire protection,
'water, sewer, flood control and transit districts.
',',t.,:"
2
Other special interest groups and members of the public are also encouraged to attend Planning
Council meetings and provide input during public comment periods.
The Tri- Valley Planning Council will serve as the' Lead Agency for the Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Pilot Project.
Technical Advisory Committee. A Technical Advisory Committee has been established to
provide staff support to the Tri- Valley Planning Council, administer consultant contrac.ts, ,and
review consultant work. The Technical Advisory Committr.e consists of one staff representative
from each of the participating cities and counties.
Representatives of special districts and other agencies operating in the Tri-Valley area will
participate as "ex-officio" members. Members of community organizations and the public will
be welcomed to attend meetings of the Technical Advisory Committee.
Proiect Consultant. The Tri-Valley Planning Council would intend to use the ABAG grant
money to hire a planning consultant. The planner would be given the following responsibilities:
1.
Provide planning services for completing the proposal at the direction of the
Technical Advisory Committee. Contract financing will be administered by the
City of San Ramon on behalf of the seven participating jurisdictions.
\,
2. Provide overall project planning coordination.
"
3.
Coordinate support provided by ABAG staff and consultants.
4, Develop all working and formal planning documents.
5. Attend and participate as needed in Tri.Valley Council, Tri-Valley Planning
Council, Technical Advisory Committee, and public workshop meetings, '
Additional consultant assistance may also be required as determined by the Tri- Valley Planning. ,
Council. Related costs would be borne by the participating jurisdictions, subject to approval by
the jurisdictions.
Memorandum of Understandine. A memorandum of understanding among the seven
participating jurisdictions will be executed to formalize the proposed organizational framework.
It will address the Tri-Valley Planning Council rules and membership, Technical Advisory
Committee rules and membership, work plan, desired final product, consensus-building,
consultant contract considerations, authorization for San Ramon to execute consultant contracts,
and future implementation expectations.
',.~,.'
3
c. INTERIM WORK PLAN
During the time between the submittal of this proposal and the anticipated date of notification
regarding disposition of the grant (February 1, 1995), two significant tasks will be undertaken,
These include:
Task 1 . The Technical Advisory Committee and Tri- Valley Planning Council will
prepare a .d.mfi memorandum of understanding for establishing the overall planning
organization.
Task 2 - The Technical Advisory Committee will prepare a draft request for proposals
for the project consultant and a list of interested/qualified consultants, The draft will be
reviewed and modified as necessary by the Tri- Valley Planning Council. It will then be
distributed as per the list of planning consultants if the grant is approved.
Task 3 . Special districts and other agencies operating in the Tri- Valley area will be
contacted regarding their participation in the work program.
D. PROJECT WORK PLAN AND TIME TABLE
\.
Following grant approval on about February 1, 1995, the following work plan and time table
would be followed:
Task 1 - Each participating jurisdiction will enter into the proposed memorandum of
understanding. The Tri-Valley Planning Council will select the planning consultant upon
recommendation by the Technical Advisory Committee. The consultant will enter into
a contract with the City of San Ramon acting on behalf of the Tri- Valley Planning
Council. (February 21)
"
Task 2 . The project consultant will review and analyze existing local plans, policies.
and procedures to identify key subregional issues, opportunities, and constraints. ABAG
staff will assemble the appropriate documents and highlight relevant provisions for. ,
analysis by the consultant. (March 10)
Task 3 - A preliminary public workshop will be conducted. The proposed planning
process will be described, and public comments will be solicited to identify key
subregional policy issues. Public comments will be recorded by ABAG staff for
integration into a "Tri. Valley Subregional Planning Issues Summary Report." (March 20)
Task 4 . The consultant will prepare a series of four working papers. Working
Papers 1.3 will analyze the "Menu of Subregional Land Use Policies" prepared by
ABAG, and other policy issues identified during Tasks 2 and 3. Policies will be
recommended ~hich are appropriate to local and subregional conditions and meet the
_.
.~:A,-" t
4
. ,
regionwide goals and objectives noted above. These will collectively form the basis of
the draft subregional planning strategy for the Tri-Valley area. . The three Working
Papers will cover at least the following topics:
Workinl! Paper 1 - Location and intensity of urban development (April 7)
W orkin~ PaDer 2 - Natural resource protection and management, and
transportation (April 21)
, .
Workinl! PaDer 3 - Housing supply and affordability, and economic vitality;
other issues of subregional importance (May S)
Workinl! Paper 4 will outline options for implementing the draft subregional
strategy recommended in Working Papers 1-3. This would include an outline of
the adoption process by member jurisdictions following completion of the draft
document. (May 19)
Each working paper will be reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee, made
available to the public for comments, and reviewed at public meetings by the Tri-Valley
Planning Council prior to adoption by the Tri-Valley Planning Council.
ABAG staff will gather and analyze a significant portion of the technical information
needed to form the policy recommendations in Working Papers 1-3. It will also provide
input from the regional perspective during the policy development phase.
Task 5 - Infonnation contained in the four working papers will be summarized and
consolidated into a preliminary draft document by the consultant. This document will
comprise the "Tri- Valley Subregional Planning Strategy." It will consist primarily of
model goals, objectives, and policy language for potential inclusion in local general plans
and related policy documents. It will also include an outline for the adoption process and
a draft schedule. The document will be reviewed by the Technical Advisory Committee
and the Tri- VaHey Planning Council for preliminary comments. The resulting revised
ID:af.t will then be made available for public review and comments.
'\
ABAG staff will assist in the graphics and production of the document. (June S)
Task 6 - A public workshop will be conducted to present the ID:iill "Tri-Valley
Subregional Planning Strategy," and receive input. ABAG staff will record all written
and verbal comments and integrate them into a technical supplement. (June 26)
Task 7 - The Qmfi "Tri- Valley Subregional Planning Strategy" will be presented to the
Tri-Valley Council for review and comments. ABAG staff will again record all
comments and integrate them into a technical supplement. (June 28)
.:
. ,"
.,.~;:Ih
,(
5
Task 8 - The Tri-Valley Planning Council will review the mfi "Tri-Valley Subregional
Planning Strategy" along with all previous commer,ts at a public meeting(s), adopt the
document, and formally recommend adoption by member jurisdictions in the desired final
form. (July 29)
Task 9 - A "Technical Supplement" to the "Tri- Valley Subregional Planning Strategy"
report will be assembled by ABAG staff to serve as background information for the
project. (July 31)
"
"
'\
,~
";~;' .
6
lj":~ ! --- ~ q "- ~ '':o!.-:J....:-"-:"- ,-' fl;a ll;}U!i --) I \ _":":"I'IU'\U~':"')r-:O"":"I-' :', ,---- ---~-. ,-
. .1..__ '!"'t ......., I ~Clr-m" .. .. ------
i&:A ""","'!-.~';~ I '.,;0, ... \ - --_. ./ ..A';
101" ~'''' ~ 'I~T'-:'~ . -. ~~~ ':,. ~! ,Usno:) '!~ r l.J.~~~l ''''0 I 'r'a31~V"1'( \ =__- · ,$ ...r '
'C. 0'-0 l;;e"''' W I' - '" I~l,:~~ /
.! 1M ,( fJ. .. l J! ::! -= """11. "''''C/'''~1' ....,... ~ I i:!::l' ?'~
11~i. J.So.) ~ 'liW'i",~",e.M ""i'~"~""" 'II, ...~ ...!u...... , 'Y
IE! 8~ ,~,:4../ : It.l.\'o.) _ ~b~;" t! .....11 ~,". ........ ,... \ i5 s:;'\\',./ (f >
1 s= .n~ t G~':~~) ,.~. "'8 ) ! L. (...~~ ) )~
: f' '"jl z ...0~f; $\ l I! IJ 1! "'---r Y i.\ · ' 1\Z
it...r,-, ~". '~B1r" -,........... ri'~; I, · ~ ' cs: I: ~ J. ; ::l
l ~..~ I _/'(" 'Ill ~,' '.I:e I' C .~ " :10
~:I' ~' f'j. : "'~'ih.'.)ll ~~ ~.'Iiai = ! rn~; 0 ... ~\ i /./ i /
I~O~ :r~ 0' ~I ,...,~:. ! .. i. ~,,~.. - '~II~I ... 0
.0.. 1 ~ , .-J t . r', il (I~ '1 1) l ~ lII: - /
ilO I 5 "'.3 j '" l ;;0.- \' '1!/'c ~;- ~ \( i" ~.' ~ IG , \'~ ' ,.IV
~j ip fI:';~ ~1 "t.~.".: ~ '~-.,___.A. '"&.". \ ~V~~~"ifi ~~ <t lA l./
i5~ Z 1 ~.. 1l '''"?J .. . Om R...,-J ~~el~ .... [7 ", ~~~:R., ~~
= "" . l~ ,,) ( ',.7_ )\1';':' 1,<:. ::.;:; "' ~ /". ~ !li!! cs:: _."..; '~i V C
""~~, I'M pooy:.r,!l> : , I:. .. ~. y j';r:-'~'!l' ,,0 -- ,...~ ~..;..~'
"
"...-::.f1.:y.....r.- J~~. i'. ..!ltl".....,.~'" I \:.: ~o" III !~I';;=.Il>>:'f,\ gi~ \1\....,; ~..-r ~ ~-; l~;:_.!i;f"
F ef " rr. ~ '" T 1 t:l~ -= '...c.., . ~ ., · ::: O'}'.
e '" n l~ . lu1> .. s-'..~" "1 '. ,0 ;!i~-~' k~ ~ :Jf' f1 ( or.. {~ ;'-~
i ; i~l ~ - !.:i IJ- goO..p.r I ~ - .... /I '~~' :':J~"Ql', .~ t~" N~lA~"':r~~ ( ! (' '" ":: I~ ~\ (..;0;-
=l..f' ,~ . Z .~!:'- ,...' ..... . ~e l ~;r~ ~t - ~ ... ",."
~r""Ii f ~'Jf I ~ -2:lP ! :;~' . i' ":, j'~ ';'" >"" ~l/
10- ''''''II ~~ I.... =g:ll i....... ~ -~ ".,,-. J lie c ~ I.. ......... .L~ l::a~ ~ II
~OI! ~ ' ...O~;; , ~ eJ:..7"',~~ ~.~ l~iJ Uf~1 ~~I ~ (<!.....\"\...... J'
1 4'; (.) !i~... ~ ' ,~, ng~~ \ /Ill. Jj II fP '.. ,,\ . ~ n ~ \\ .
'" ~. ,,' I.p e~.a rr \WV~fS~J 00 '.... '-c;:<'~ / \ r
.;, ~ 1 ' I r. ~ '~ I'" '/I . li .!.. L~ .!, I ~ ~, "....;.w ~\l-" j y ~
'"6 A il ih~~.-", .... ,-;;- ~/. :::-';"..~ "'V rl~.t~ti\ i~V~h --- n.....:_ . --i', ((<'....r---i1 "'oi
......... ' '.. It ~\ " R.od' ~&~ \1....:'! , '"'I' ':\ C
L ~: or" · t I. J. :3;'- r/.!, # W · . :i \" .l --&;"~ a~
ill- : -' "' , J '~ 1\, _,\:..-... Y; lJ t i !! ~ \ , .... \ lit1', <!i:
i!: Z \....u~. " '..., "' '...:r .~ !l .~\' 'py ~ If .< , i I ~ " ~ ~ ....~
m .O-~ 'f)- ..--:..J., ... ~ \t:......., ..j~~-,-' I,BoJi .t.... ~ f. ;'!i -.I"""d ~ ; ~.
.. 0 'II~\' . ,~ ; ! .., ~X6fiji- .. ..\\... ~..~~. 'J I ~ '1~~~'\;';;::'~'" : it
l ~ ~ '" -~ i.~." ~ ~ l-i l' ~f~ ~~. p; HJ~1 . .' :-:. -1<..., · .~'\. .C
,... tf~jIlU~~~ ~~~ . w!~, ~~ ,~\. ~ l4#, J.'Ii'!-L'. ,'" .. f ~i ~ , :/!!23:l
:5 ,r:::....'!',~[9i ~'tf.:.:' u ~-I ,,"'" .' .L.._............ 1r .,.oK'.: :::~~. ;p~, ... i r I .~ , '~~i'r
~\U-.r~,.~ ~:9~":'!:1\~~ ~. ~~ .. .b_'_ --, . T~~\~] ,,~~;II:r~-\['I- -~.._=g'~~I.i' ~":4~SS
-..{...ili~ 11-" .' '.ll.1 'A-;;.. ~ o...a..n,'" ~" . \':.~~~ \d,l.h~''':~ 1 ' 3~ 1.\ "..q., j.~
,Jf;~"l!!:i ),a,,~" lr. t ~ ~l ~_ ,II ~~ ~ ~ '" Z ~ ,. ~ P \'.r.;3 a ~ I:;"
~,"~ ~;.' " l~ IJ- 7i\' .... ~ ~\ e \/y. .i.od _ u ~~
''\!:'' . . 1O It!, ~ l .....~, Z r10 Z ... , - , sl ~: ' .,
l! l::~ = '.t: f g-Lf ~"!'l e~"""": " .. ;': '.~ i ) ,. oCl: j' ~ ~ i ...' ~ 1\ itffi"tf ~~:
:lot III ~~ ~_' I _ 'J "Z,. Ill" ~,\'o' Z ...:...' :. =- i ~ i.~.. i "f. ;.~ .~ jJU..
. ~ 'lS ~... ., ~>' . . " · - :"\'~/ J ·
l!;;:" ,:,".' ~ I,~' '.,;~.. 0:,:5 . "~~"'1h~'
, ,/; ~~~E ' ...-~J., ' !,o",,"'r ~:-: l"'~iD:, Tf ~! } ~ !:.,.~ ~'
i ~~ & J"-' ~. '"~"'" ~ I Jf? J"V',:.;., "S\ 'foO ..J ~i.. b
~ ~. -"'".".~ ~~ ~ .. ~ iii 11 'oF.. l.:;:t .:..,~... ' ." ~ ~l. U 0- -) VI .
i:J.I....~. .tI, ~... ~ II -ilil. V.,"'- .. . .I U "i<........ ~ .
:'0' d'3:::t~ ~ = I =i';-< J ,.M/I-. '\. --~ 'J1.," ~:; .: ~~~,F,6,io;
, 1l~-~1;3WUl~' - !~~,-i'l~'I~! ~......, r' -~~ 7' ~ Q!~'l~! ~ r~~:r:'
I~ ~ Q c( ~i i! '.0 ti!;li'21 .~ JZc""'r,..' ... w' ."'S "~ ~ ~ t!J D: !!! ~ 0 ~~ "
';;:0' ~~. ~J,,::.~\ 'J ~II~~ ~'~'CI'" ".od, ~i;~ ~!e ~"~~i CJ c:t ~"~. of t'G~ .
'.... ~ c,,,,tr I I "'\~ :. 0 i~ I"'~"~ .1 Ii.. \. >-..... ," w ~\ '\" ,
-.1bl.~~ '''i ~flfii. 'J<'~ r..~~~. ~ ~~, ~ / " ~ .y" o~ j~~. f':i J ..., a: to.... ~ "~r
d';!~'^ . 8 ~ . ..1:.-1/ ...\., ;':" \ ~o n:ft...~e:~ll' ,i ,-" ~ c:t ~~'" ~ F'
~-II'\;:, .i I r. .! oCl: (M;(;,I N)~en~il .il ~ ~ Z ...'.. ~..
~ i ~~ ~"'_. ,J., . \\ C!) 1(:,,:,1 oO '!~~fc1 &. ~I" '5; z" ! .n II fe! !!
~' ,....."'" r ..' . 1 .t....:l5 ';' ~ ~~ ~ "If, ..,;1; ~ . 't;;!II c:( Z '6:' U I! ..
..J Z
it ~'Vo 1/.'- ~ 'tl~ r .:..iJ:~:[:I~~'~; rl~~~ :~i ~~~. · ':; v.,& ~~~ ; ~ ~W~
. .~ 'J~ s!m~'~ d. 'Z. . :.:~..-.. - .,. - ~ 1 ~ I'i - eii}C.ti!m -i ' _1'!C:&fI!;. -x:
. > ~ _ ), 0; ~ 0 ..... ~..J( e . .....-J:l ... Cr ,- ~......---..:
, Fl 11 ,-, ~ ~ f ~ - , .li'1I ~ 0 · ~::w.~, ~, " '" I';~ c:( '/" I
_ f11f! gi; ~~ a "Jill a. t' titl..r-.p~'~;~~'~ - ~ //.
~!~ '.\" "ro.:~ g Ii 'liiR .rl7)~(}.~ = ~li1 ~'/l~y'". ~- a: ' '
~ ;s i!/ 'i1:~':.'! \i IH~ - , l'J.~~~ :1L:\. ~~~ f)[ ~.. ~e"l~ ~ ,.
;t", ,,1( ii ~ i 7~",~~ f~)t~ ~...:;5; ~~X1/ as i '
~ \: ~\'~ t~- "~ !:!!i1~" ,~ ~ J! ' .. Z
oS ' 81"~ 0 .. ~ ~x ..
.e ,,~ ~ ~x ," it \1 :~'rik~ .. 1" '/~ 01(
l. '! ..,., R"F~. II .., =1 ,'f i _ . ~_ "'~"'"n';17P '1l... ~3 ....~::: / " en
, ~\
i tt;,
/~ Ii \.
E. DESCRIPTION OF WORK PRODUCT
The final work product will consist of two documents. The first is the "Tri-Valley Subregional
Planning Strategy," a policy guide for participating jurisdictions to potentially use for updating
their General Plans and related policy documents. The second is a "Technical Supplement, II,
which includes the background information used to develop the Strategy. Conceptual outlines
for each document are presented below:
J'r;-Val1ey Subre!!io"al Plan"I"!! Stratcl!v
1. Background
2. Purpose
3. Description of the Tri- Valley subregion
4. Identification of primary subregion planning issues, opportunities, and constraints
5. Recommended goals, objectives, and policy language. At least the following
issues are intended to be addressed:
..
A.
Location and Intensity of Urban Development
Urban growth boundaries/open space preservation
Annexation and urban expansion
Infrastrocture (water and sewer)
Land use and development intensity
'\
B. Natural Resource Protection and Mana~ement
Conservation of ecological resources and wildlife corridors
Preservation of agricultural resources
Protection of community identity
.Air quality
Water quality
C. Tran!iportation
Transit-centered development
Auto-oriented development
Mixed-land use
Non-auto use through site design
D. Housini Supply and Affordability
Increasing housing supply
Increasing housing affordability
, .
".r..,
8
E. Economic Vitality
F. Other Issues
Other issues of subregional importance
Other issues relating to selected member jurisdictions
(The ~bove will include those additional issues identified through'
Task 1 of the Work Program)
7. Adoption Process
8. Model "Regional Planning Element" for optional adoption by participating
jurisdictions. This model might also be used by other jurisdictions in the Bay
Area and State.
Technical SUDplement
..
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Description of contents
ABAG Request for Proposals
"Menu of Subregional Land Use Policies" <ABAG)
Memorandum of Understanding
"Tri-Valley Subregional Planning Issues Summary Report"
Working Papers 1-4
Written comments from the public
'\
,~
".~":,,
9
...
II. RESOLUTIONS OF COMMITMENT
Resolutions from the Town of Danville and the Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton and San
Ramon are included.
The Alameda County Board of Supervisors will be considering the resolution of commitment at
its meeting of November 29, 1994. The Contra Costa Board of Supervisors will be considering
the resolution at its meeting of December 5, 1994. These resolutions will be forwarded when
completed.
"
~'
- ~~:.
",~,
10
RESOLUTION NO. 144-94
A RESOLUTION OF mE TOWN COUNCIL OF mE
TOWN OF DANVIllE SUPPORTING mE TRI VALLEY COUNCIL
COMPREHENSIVE SUBREGIONAL PlANNING COMMI'ITEE
WHERFAS. the Tri Valley Council composed of the Town ofDanville, the Cities of Dublin,
LivermoJ'e. Pleaanton, and San Ramon. and the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa
was creat:F.:'.i in 1984;
WHERF..A~. the Tri Valley Council was fanned to address issues of regional concern;
, ,WHEREAS;'. the "Tri"Valley' Council has a proven' record' of 'supporting subregional
cooperatiQ:'l as evidenced by the effortS of the Tri Valley Transportation Council;
..
WHEREA~. the Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a request for proposals
for the Conarrehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program to develop a draft subregional
strategy of model goals, objectives and policies for inclusion in local general plans;
WHEREAS, the Tri Valley Council has formed the Tri Valley Council Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Committee to further subregional cooperation and the development
of a draft subregional strategy;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council that the Town of Danville
.. hereby supportS the application to the Association of Bay Area Governments for a grant
to assist in development of a Tri Valley Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot
Program.
'\
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town of Danville supports the Tri Valley Council's
establishment of the Tri Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee
to prepare and submit the grant aiJplication and to develop the subsequent
comprehensive subregional policy plan.
AND BE IT FURmER RESOI.VED that the Town ,of Danville agrees to participate in the.
preparation of the draft subregional p0licy t:JW:1.
APPROVED by the Town Council of the Town of Danville at a Regular Meeting held on
November 15, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:
Ritchey.
None
None
None
Greenberg. Doyle. Sh1mansky. Waldo
~~~
..
(""
AITEST:
. &LUc.u..J ~~
CITY CLERK
,..
RESOLUTION NO. 118 - 94
A RESC~UTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF TIlE CITY OF DUBLIN
------------------~---------~-----------------~~--~~--~----~~---------
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE TRI-VALLEY COUNCIL
COMPREHENSIVE SUBREGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE
WJlEREAS, the Tri-valley Council composed of the Town of Danville,
the cities of DUblin, Livermore., Pleasanton, and San Ramon, ,and the
, , Counties of Alameda and Contra costa wa~ created in 1984; and
WllEREAS, the 'l'ri-Valley Council was formed to address issue.s of
regional concern; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley council has a proven record of supporting
subregional cooperation as evidenced by the efforts of the Tri-Valley
Transportation council; and
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a
request for proposals for the comprehensive Subregional Planning pilot
Program to develop a draft subregional strategy of model goals,
objectives and policies for inclusion in local general plans; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley council has formed the 'Tri-Valley Council
comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee to further SUbregional
cooperation and the development of a draft subregional strategy.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the city council that the city
of Dublin hereby supports the application to the 'Association of Bay
Area Governments for a grant to assist in development of a Tri-Valley
comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program.,
" '\
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the city of Dublin supports the Tri-
Valley Council's establishment of the Tri-Valley Council comprehensive
subregional Planning committee to prepare and submit the grant .
application and to develop the subsequent draft subregional strategy.
AND BE IT FURTJlER RESOLVED that the city of Dublin agrees to
participate in the preparation of the draft subregional strategy.
On the motion by councilmember Moffatt, seconded by councilmember
Houston, the foregoing resolution was adopted at the city council
Meeting of November 14, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSEN'1' :
councilmembers Houston, Howard, Moffatt and Mayor Snyder
Councilmember Burton
None
...~""
r./-~"~~
Mayor
A'1"1' EST:
IN THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF UVERMORE
STATE OF CAliFORNIA
A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE TRI- V ALLEY COUNCIL
COMPREHENSIVE SUBREGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE
The Tri~Valley Council composed of the Town of Danville, the Cities of Dublin, Livermore,
Pleasanton, and San Ramon, and the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa was created in 1984.
The Tri-Valley Council was fonned to address issues of regional concern.
The Tri-Valley Council has a proven record of supporting subregional cooperation as
evidenced by the efforts of the Tri- Valley Transportation Council.
The Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a request for proposals for the
Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program to develop a draft sub~egional strategy of model
goals, objectives and policies for inclusion in local general plans.
\
The Tri-Valley Council has fonned the Tri-Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional
Planning Committee to further subregional cooperation and the development of a draft subregional
strategy .
'\
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council that the City of Livermore
hereby supports the application to the Association of Bay Area Governments for a grant to assist in
development of a Tri-Valley Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of Livermore supports the Tri-Valley Council's
establishment of the Tri- Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee to prepare
and submit the grant application and to develop the subsequent comprehensive subregional policy
plan. "
AND BE IT FURTIlER RESOLVED that the City of Livennore agrees to participate in the
preparation of the draft subregional policy plan.
AS TO FORM:
.:
'.:~.;' ,
RESOLUTION NO.
94-293
, '7i
On motion of Councilmember Var ,e;as
Councilmember WieskRmp
adopted this 28th day of November
, seconded by
, the foregoing Resolution'was passed and,
, 1994, by the following vote:
AYES:
COUNCILMEMBERS Reitter, Stein, Var,e;as, Wieskamp, & Navor Brow11
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: NONE
..
b~A/-/~' l~
MAYOR, CITY OF UVERMORE, ,CAllFORNIA
,
ATTEST:
11128194
"
';A.'
RESOLUTION NO.
, 2
14
94-293
, ,
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON
ALAMEDA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION NO. 94.138
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING TIlE TRI- V ALLEY COUNCn..
COMPREHENSIVE SUBREGIONAL PLANNING
COMMI1"n:E '
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council composed of the Town of DanviIle, the Cities of Dublin,
Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon, and the Counties of Alameda and Contra
Costa was created in 1984; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council was fonned to address issues of regional concern; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has a proven record of supporting subregional cooperation
as evidenced by the efforts of the Tri.Valley Transportation Council; and
;',
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a request for proposals for
the Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program to develop a draft
subregional strategy of model goals, objectives and policies for inclusion in the
local general plans; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has formed the Tri-Valley Council Comprehensive '\
Subregional Planning Committee to further subregional cooperation and the
development of a draft subregional strategy.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF TIm CITY OF PLEASANTON RESOLVES
AS FOLLOWS:
Section I: . The City Council supports the application to the Association of Bay Area
Governments for a grant to assist in development of a Tri-Valley Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Pilot Program.
Section 2: The City Council supports the Tri-Valley Council's establishment of the Tri-
Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee to prepare and
submit the grant application and to develop the subsequent comprehensive
subregional policy plan.
, Section 3: The City Council agrees to participate in the preparation of the draft subregional
policy plan.
.0
",A,,:' .
., ,.
Resolution No. 94.138
Page Two
Section 4: This resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING WAS DULY AND
REGULARLY ADOPTED ,BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PLEASANTON, AT,
A MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER IS, 1994 BY THE FOLLOWING VOTE:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Council members .. Dennis, Mohr, and Pica
None
Council member Scribner and Mayor Tarver
None
..
ATfF.ST: ~
@J .
peg~drO' C y Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ()
t1~ !f-:f?t~
Michael H. Roush, City Attorney
"
'.,1"
1 F.
RESOLUTION NO. 94.141
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITI' COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAMON
SUPPORTING A GRANT APPLICATION TO ABAG FOR THE COMPREHENSr\'E
SUBREGIONAL PLANNING PILOT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council composed of the Town of Dan vi lie, ~he Cities of
Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton and San Ramon, and the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa
was created in 1984; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council was formed to address issues of regional concern,
and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has a proven record of supporting subregional
cooperation as evidence by the efforts of the Tn- Valley Transportation Council; and
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a request for
proposals for the Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program to develop a draft
subregional strategy of model goals, objectives and policies for inclusion in local general plan; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has fonned the Tn-Valley Council Comprehensive
Subregional Planning Committee to further subregional cooperation and the development of a
drat{ subregional strategy.
'\
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of San Ramon
hereby supports the application to the Association of Bay Area Governments for a grant to assist
in development of a Tri- Valley Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Program,
- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City of San Ramon supports the Tri-Valley
Council's establishment of the Tn- Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional Planning
Committee to prepare and submit the grant application and agrees to participate in the preparation
of the draft subregional policy plan.
"
.;
..;~:'
... Signoture:i on next page: ...
Resolution No. 94-141
page 2
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at the meeting of November 22. 1994 by the
following votes: ' .
A YES: COIf11cilml.!mbers Room. Kinney. Oliver, Welm & Mayor Carr
NOES: Non/!
ABSENT: SeJlll!
ABSTAIN: NOli/!
...
ATTEST:
'\
"1;",.:"
. ~~__~~':"-_':........_.-TTT_____ ..._ ...._ . _ __
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
November 28, 1994
GAYLE BISHOP
SUPERVISOR. THIRD DISTRICT
Gary BinKer - PlanninK Director
Association of Bay Area Governments
P.O. Box 2050
OaklaDd, California 94604-2050
Dear Mr. BiDeer:
As a represeDtative from the CODtra Costa Board of Supervisors ("Board") to the Tri-
Valley Council, I would like to express Contra Costa County's interest in and intent to
participate iD the CompreheDsive SubreKional PlanDinE Pilot Project pursuant to the
grant proposal presented to the Association of Bay Area Governments ("ABAG"). I have
been participatinE in the preliminary meetinls where Tri-Valley jurisdictions have
considered the form and substance of the Erant proposal which this letter accompanies.
The Irant proposal is consistent with Board loals and policies on subreeional planning,
especially as relatinK to the Tri-Valley area.
While the Board has Dot had the opportunity to meet to adopt a formal resolution, I
would like to state that Contra Costa County supports the concept of subregional
planning and the process envisioned by the ABAG proeram. A formal resolution will be
preseDted to the Contra Costa Board at our next replarly scheduled meeting on "
December 5, 1994, in the form enclosed herewith. At such time that the resolution is
formally adopted, it will be forwarded to you.
If you should have any further questions, do not hesitate to call my office at 820-8683.
Very truly yours,
'. t
-~p ji~fif
GA YLE BISHOP
Vice Chair, Board of Supervisors
cc:
Contra Cost.a County Board of Supervisors - members
Phil Batchelor-:~ Contra Costa County Administrator
".1'..,
Member jurisdictions - TVPC
18 CROW CANYON COURT #120 . SAN RAMON, CALIFORNIA 94583-1669 . TE..EPHONE (510)820-8683 · FACSIMILE (510)820-6627
, n
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLunON OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY SUPPORTING THE TRI-VALLEY COUNCn. COMPREHENSWE
SUBREGIONAL PLANNING COMMITfEE
WHEREAS, The Tri Valley Council composed of the Town of Danville, the Cities of
Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San Ramon, arid the Counties of Alameda and
Contra Costa County was created in 1984;
WHEREAS, the Tri Valley Council was formed to address issues of reeional concern;
WHEREAS, the Tri Valley Council has a proven record of supporting subregional
cooperation as evidenced by the efforts of the Tri Valley Transportation Council;
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a request for
proposals for the Comprehensive Subregional Plannine Pilot Program to develop a draft
subregional strateK)' of model goals, objectives, and policies for inclusion in local eeneral
plans;
..
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Contra Costa County hereby supports the
application to the Association of Bay Area Governments for a grant to assist in
development of a Tri Valley Comprehensive Subregional Planning Pilot Proeram.
"
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Contra Costa County supports the Tri Valley
Council's establishment of the Tri Valley Council Comprehensive Subreeional Planning
Committee to prepare and submit the grant application and to develop the subsequent
comprehensive subregional policy plan. '
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Contra Costa County agrees to participate
in the preparation of the draft subregional policy plan.
APPROVED by Contra Costa County at a regular meeting held on
by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:
.,;'
".r.,,' '
III. LETTERS OF SUPPORT
.
".~" .
'\
21
....I-~ .1: ...
lil'\I,lltll 111I,ll h'I.,"
. . ~, ."..
It:': ;...~:..~
\, ~~. ::. 'L'~ !:~"'F'"
- ,'.. : "" ~ ~!....'
. 'I ~.I '." 'j
~"l'l;r" .:... '";1'"
T., .;' ,'I .
;,," ~ :: "'I"',f ,.
,I' _ '~:"
,10..:-:" ~I'
Co i"l: :-~ 5',~''''
G('!,~ (.1 !..'jf"aJ~'
;.
~ EAST BAY REGi~NAI. PARK DISTRICT IlI:CI:'''I:O
NOV 9
~ 9 7994
PLANNING DE
PARTMENr
November 28, 1994
Susan Frost
Senior Planner
Planning Department
City of Livermore
1052 S. Livermore Avenue
Livermore, CA 94550
Dear Susan:
This letter is to accompany the resolution and board
memorandum supporting the Tri-Valley Planning Council's
application to ABAG for a subregional planning grant
which I gave you at this morning's Planning Council
meeting. They are calendared for the East Bay Regional
Park District's Board of Directors meeting of December
6th, and the resolution is expected to be adopted as
recommended by the General Manager. I will send a
letter directly to ABAG after the 6th, reporting the
Board's official action.
'\
Please include this letter as a cover for the
memorandum and resolution in the application to ABAG.
Once again, thanks for all your help in pulling the
application together. '
~;:;~;~:::::: Manager
cc: R. Doyle
c:\m\94\trivly.ltr
.;!..~":':"~I
2950 Peralta Oaks Court p,o. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605 O:';Bl Tel: 510 635 0135 Fax: 510 569 4319
AGENDA
REGULAR MEETING
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
Tuesday, December 6, 1994
D. BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD
ADVANCED PLANNING AND LAND ACQUISITION
"
Resolution of Support for the Tri-Valley Council
Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee's
Application for Planning Funds from the Association
of Bav Area Gove~nments (DavIe)
RECOMMENDATION
The General Manager recommends that the Board adopt the
accompanying resolution supporti~g the application of the Tri-
Valley Council for a $55,000 Association of Bay Area Governments
(ABAG) granc for development of a subregional planning strategy for
the Tri-Valley area of Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. In
addition to supporting the applicacion the resolution supports Park
District participation in the prcgram as a special district with
significant property ownership, park, open space and trail
operations, and broa~ land stewardship interests, in the Tri - Valley
area.
'\
REVENUE/COST
The only cost to the District will be Advanced Planning Department
staff time necessary to participate in the development of the
proposed subregional strategy.
BACKGROUND
Earlier this autumn, ABAG put forth a request for proposals to Bay
Area member agencies to apply for a $55,000 grant to develop a
"subregional planning" !>trategy. This is part of ABAG's effort to
encourage subregions of the nine-county Bay Area to coordinate
their planning more closely.
In response to the ABAG request the jurisdictions that make up the
Tri-Valley region - the Town of Danville, Cities of Dublin,
Livermore, Pleasanton and San Ramon and Alameda and Contra Costa
Counties have formed a special subcommittee to prepare a
proposal. The subcommittee - chaired by Millie Greenberg - has met
several times and is drafting a proposal to be submitted to ABAG by
the November 3 0 -~t;.\eadline. The seven general purpose governments
will enter into"'~ Memorandum of Understanding to set up a "policy
commi t tee" to administer the grant and to carry out the work
program. Special districts will be i"n,vited to policy committee
,L
meetings and will participate through a Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) composed of staff representatives. Public input
will come through public "scoping" meetings and subsequent public
'meetings on draft elements of the Subregional Strategy. The work
program will be carried out primarily by a planning consultant,
with specific staff support from ABAG and from staff of the seven
member agencies and special districts. AB~n expects to select one
subregion in the Bay Area as recipient of the grant by early 1995
and the process of developing a subregional strategy is expected to
take approximately six months.
The Tri-Valley area has been one of the most active centers 0:
development and future planned development in the Bay Area.
Although there has been considerable contention over these
development plans, the Tri-Valley Council, established about 10
years ago, has had some success in maintaining communication and
supporting subregional approaches rather than purely local
positions. This proposal hopes to build on the past successes and
increase the ability of the local jurisdictions to work together.
The products is not envisioned as a common plan ,to be adopted by
all, but rather as a strategy for working toward a higher degree of
commonality among the general plans and other planning efforts of
the participants.
The Park District has taken an active role in expressing its
interests with regard to projects in the Tri-Valley area, e.g.,
Dougherty Valley, Eastern Dublin, North Livermore, etc. This
proposal, if it is successful in receiving the ABAG grant, offers
the District an excellent opportunity to play its appropriate role
in the future of the Tri-Valley area. The accompanying resolution
expresses the District's support and desire to participate. A copy
of it and this memo will be forwarded to ABAG with a cover letter
stating that they are recommended for adoption at the December 6
Board meeting.
..
ALTERNATIVES
No alternative is recommended.
',,,-,' '
'\
'"
?A
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
RESOLUTION NO. 1994-12-
December 6, 1994
RESOLUTION OF SUPPORT FOR THE TRI-VALLEY COUNCIL COMPREHENSIVE
SUBREGIONAL PLANNING COMMITTEE'S APPLICATION FOR PLANNING FUNDS
FROM THE ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council composed of the Town of
Danville, the Cities of Dublin, Livermore, Pleasanton, and San
Ramon, and the Counties of Alameda and Contra Costa was created in
1984 for the purpose of addressing issues of concern to the Tri-
Valley subregion; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has a proven record of
supporting subregional cooperation as evidenced by the efforts of
the Tri-Valley Transportation Council and by efforts in the areas
of affordable housing, non-smoking ordinanqes, and growth
management; and
-.
WHEREAS, the Association of Bay Area Governments has issued a
request for proposals for the Comprehensive Subregional Planning
Pilot Program to develop a draft. subregional strategy of model
goals, objectives and polici,es for inclusion in local general
plans; and
WHEREAS, the Tri-Valley Council has formed' the Tri-valley
Council Comprehensive Subregional Planning Committee to further
subregional cooperation and the development of a draft subregional
strategy; and
'\
WHEREAS, the Tri - Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional
Planning Committee, in the preparation of a proposal to be
submitted to the Association of Bay Area Governments for $55,000
grant for development of a subregional strategy, has invited and
encouraged special districts and other interested agencies to
participate in the development of the strategy; and
WHEREAS, the East Bay Regional Park District has substantial
interests in the Tri-Valley area, including the current and
prospective ownership of large tracts of land, the management and
operation of numerous regional parks, open spaces, recreation
facilities and trails serving the Tri-Valley area, and stewardship
responsibilities for the natural resources related to its lands.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of
the East Bay Regional Park District hereby supports the application
to the Association of Bay Area Governments for a grant to assist in
development of a'.:.:. Tri-Valley Comprehensive Subregional Planning
pilot Progr~m; ana
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Boa~d of Directors of the Eas~
Bay Regional Park District hereby supports the Tri-Valley Council's
establishment of the Tri-Valley Council Comprehensive Subregional
Planning Committee to prepare and submit the grant application and
to develop the'subsequent comprehensive subregional policy plan;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Directors of the East
Bay Regional Park District hereby agrees to participate in the
preparation of the draft subregional policy plan as a S!pecial
district with important 'interests in the Tri-Valley are~; and .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the General Manager is hereby
authorized and directed, on behalf of the District and its name, to
execute and deliver such ,documents and to do such acts as may be
deemed necessary or appropriate to accomplish the intentions of the
above resolution,
Moved by Director , seconded by Director
, and adopted this 6th day of December 1994 by the
following vote:
FOR:
."
AGAINST:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
'\
~.
','
. ~..iC",
NOV. -29' 94!TUEI 14:18
DUSKSS toollCl. omclRS
Irwf'..'
1'_: O'Mllley .
~rI STlllllO Co.
Livcrmllu
Vice lJ~rlu'
J:obvr H. l'/,,}J,
V.lleT C.,e He-IrA S,""II
liuuAroll
SOUt/Ut'
/, .Btuce L.,rJ..4
1.!lc Cluu CutJP.Il1
'l...u"raa
0/111 Ff"'lIrfaJ olfJ<<,
Cl>_,k. O/dll'"
C;W... .. Dn/.
Ik;II..uu
llUSlt.E3S toUiCl DF.feTOft3
-. T....,. C/ur,u.
L.",can UrUIUtc
/'I-li.,,'/ ].darllllrT
U.".'llIore
!t ClJditoli
CodirvJi Moron
l.i rCTIIIIl,e
l'.r CII"clIIl
0..... Cllllrtalu
Ddli.
I"'" Q..-(.,.
S.a'l. H.rillacll.d
Ur~.1C
,k.hll Lau
SA.... I',",petri". Co, -
1M 'thurU'C
Du bill!
II:n Cb.ichAcut
SilaUluc PnperUu
pJunoroll
S,... CJJmotlt
LeI'Ute SpOIlt lac.
I'/"ucl!r.a .
/of,tyl/adetil,:r.ll
Hdl,IJ_ Mc."lJcJ,oJ,
MCe... .. J.~.'Juu;.
1'Jeudtaa
DtcJc C.n
C/d.v l.c.
1'J",,"i..
RII6ert C. '~/Jwz
fCJlhrpJ. .lUluA.iW
CfUlUlllI.a/r,. l'im
H,'/.".I...,.I;
IJeu.""iI.
JI..ktt SII",
DdlJr. (;1011'
'lru..,..
J.ruk ',"ac,
H,e/uu/, MMJ:lltllll
A SU" Coil'.
./.........
.. T./LlIer
H.rd.es.. I.
TII..-t I".."uu,c
1'J""'''''04
11111 w....
"'C4IC In..
Un'.".
TRIAD SYSTEMS CORP,
TEL:SI0 455&917
P. 002
THE'TRIMVALLEY BUSINESS ,COUNCIL, INC.
.. .. ""
November 28, 1994
Ms. Mlllie Greenburg
Town ofDanville
SlOLa Gonda Way
Danvillc, Ca 94526
Re: TriMValley Council
"Comprehensivo Subrtgional Planning Pilot Project"
Dear MiIlie:
The Tri. Valley BuaincsB Council would DIce to take this opportunity to support the efforts or tho
Tri.Valley Caumil in dMOping a Comprchcosive Subrqional Plan. The Tri.Vallcy Business ",
Council is willing to bceome an a.criV'c participant in this process and will devote it! RSOur~ to
BCQomplish this end.
I hope you are successful in obtaining the ABAG Gt1u1t.
Sincerely,
..,~y,
IV. STAFFlNG AND RESOURCES
Table 1 identifies the individuals slated to work on this project. The table also provides a
summary of the resources each participating agency will contribute to the Program. This
information is intended to satisfy requirements 4 and 5 of the ABAG grant submittal guidelines.
A. INDIVIDUALS WHO WILL WORK DIRECTLY ON THIS PROJECT
The five participating cities and the two participating counties will provide staff and other
assistance to undertake this project. In general, the planning sections of the seven respective
jurisdictions will be taking the lead role in staffing the Project. The level of effort will be
approximately 16 hours per month from each of the seven jurisdictions. Individual jurisdictions
from this group have indicated a willingness to supplement this staffing with legal counsel and
engineering services on an as-needed basis.
Under this proposal, the grant money (Le., the $55,000 grant from ABAG) will not be used as
reimbursement of staff time, but instead will be used to employ a contract planner for the term
of the project. This individual would be used to coordinate input from the seven participating
jurisdictions and, thus, reduce the amount of required staff time.
.
These staffing resources would be supplemented by the staffing and technical support offered
by ABAG and the technical support offered by the BAAQMD.
'.
B. RESOURCES TO BE SUPPLIED FROM EACH PARTICIPATING AGENCY
Additional resources in the form of meeting room space, in~house clerical service, phone
service, mailing, copying, etc., will be supplied as generally indicated on the attached table.
".r"."'!
27
;.
I'J)
~
~
~
~
o
u
....~
~u
~~
=0
~~
~
~
-<
r"
~
fi:
~
tI'J
t: t: ~ ;0.. g .; ..
;1 ;1 . .&l+l 1: ." -5
..... ~...
1 1 at: ""\c 1 t . j
, 0 CI .&l
'i; 'e : 'j ~~ ;: ! li- ""
~ .... ..
l! ~ ....i .!:l ) 'i:!! CI 11 '0
i ~'O ~~ !.~ ,- ! ~. l!! ..
.c .c &5 ,5 ~ .a E t;j .!i! 11
B . .. .,8 .. c: .. \S
.Z> +l +l ~e,,! . .~. .,2.1: .
B is is :e :e 'C B ,8 '" II.lll ~
~ <ii!.c S g . Ej
it H ... '0 ifo+l 'J~ , Ii: - , g
.... 0 u - .J.;
II j l! . ~:e ,r,; 1: - Dll
) . ... '-.... . l "'0
J .eo oS CI :::,'1 i KVI O~.&l 0-<
.;; u '5 u '~ 'I 'f] l! ~.&l ~ l! . 'E! · 11 i!l:Q
l:lJ .,8 .;.! .1 g 11 "! ':~i )1'0 'ii jj-<
rfs ~s 0 ~ ~ ~ 'I · i u .- ~
j u u ~1I.I: 'S
Ii: t: t: ~'2 :.2! +l 1 :: .I: fi .
.! ~ ~ .~ .5 .5 ~ 8 g = '! ~ 0""
~..\C U t; u::;;
VI '.1:1 VI VI < u u oo- WVl.c
,I '> "> "> "> ">
0 :E :E
u
f "> "> "> "> ">
Ill:. ~ ~
Jj ~ ~ "> "> "> "> ">
il "> "> "> "> ">
.!'tI ~ ~
I'J "> "> "> "> ">
.~
:;li.; ~ ~
... .. 0$ . "" \C \C 0 ~~
~ ~~ 8~ 0.... 8:::! ~fJ ~~ ........
~~ -~ .... .,., ....- ~~
"" ' r:':t ~... "" ' .... . '900
c):Q 0" . ... ... J.~
~ ~\C ....:1 ...... ...,... .... i.. -s:
,...,... ... .. ,...... ... ,.... ~~
J \C~ \C s~ ..~ s~ ..~ ....~
s s~ S 6' S s~
-I/o 6"- ;L&. 6,14 ~u. ;LI. ;Ll. 6.LL. i,1/o "0
~ -s
i-
.. ~ ..
'0 , ~
iQ
.."lI g .. .. ~liE ..
.. IS 0
u . ~ ~ I ti
a~ ~ I au i f.~ e
.It ~!~ · "lI .- is
:I ~... ~ ,~ :! ,-
m c~ ..It ...It - ~~ .0 ~
II l .!! .~ IS .5 15'! U a:: c!' ::I! r '5
'S IS ,- ~ ~'i!
's "'0 . u .. C . ' lil ..
~ s ~ ,- a::
B ~>: Is:: Ill. ii:~-< uli:
oQ= c!'ri'i ,rJ . ..:
0 ]~ ue.., :
u ~~ ~ L~ -< ,- ~ g r
I .!!t3 'H~! ::I!~ i:Q~
U ,5 E'i lDlD~
8 :> !~! j .. ;0.. ofr= ~1
~ ~ ~ ~u Q'! . :f :E ~
..,~ 1Il~ C .
.
e ;0..
) - ;0.. <
.il > ,~
, " ;0.. 'ii rf
1 ;0.. '-,~ " g ,z &~
i! u' ... '5
~ i o .! .. 'i ..
u e c ~ .~ i ~i5 It '/!
.... tJ ~ ~A
j 1 ~ ~ . ]j e]
e .~ .5 :II ;1 < i! e I
~ :E .. :l c: ~
~ .. c5 :5 v; Ed
0 it uu
00
N
..
'0
!
'f
..
'G
'0
..
.&l
S
II
~
..;,
..
v. mSTORY AND BACKGROUND
lri-Valley Area. The Tri.VaIley Area encompasses the cities of Dublin, Livennore Pleasanton
and San Ramon, the Town of Danville, and the surrounding areas of Alameda and Contra Costa
Counties, The current population of the Planning Area is about 220,800 with 110,000 jobs:
The Tri- Valley Area is one of the fastest growing regions in the Bay Area. According to ABAG
Projecrions '94, population could increase by 64% and jobs by 80% by the year 2010.
. The Tri-Valley area includes a diversity of land uses and geography' which includes not only
urban development, but also agriculture, viticulture, mining, and regional open space/recreation
areas. Residents of the area currently enjoy a high quality of life through excellent schools,
employment opportunities, a variety of housing choices, recreation, open space, and efficient
public services.
While each city is unique, they are facing similar challenges and opportunities as a result'of the
growth potential. Issues facing the area include transportation, affordable housing, jobs/housing
balance, open space preservation, and the provision of adequate public services. The
jurisdictions of the area realize that the challenge for the future is to effectively manage growth
to maintain those qualities which make the Tri- Valley attractive to residents and business,
.
Tri- Valley Council. The Tri- Valley Council was originally established in 1984 to address issues
'of regional concern. It currently consists of elected officials from the cities of Dublin, ,
Livermore, Pleasa.nton, San Ramon, the Town of Danville, and the counties of Alameda and
Contra Costa.
'\
An early emphasis on transportation resulted in the establishment of the Tri-Valley
Transportation Council (1991), a Joint Powers Agreement that includes the five cities and both
Alameda and Contra Costa counties. The Tri- Valley Transportation Council is engaged in
comprehensive sub-regional transportation planning which crosses county boundaries, and also
incorporates the requirements of both counties' half cent sales tax measures and Congestiqn
Management Agencies.
The Affordable Housing Committee (1992) of the Tri- Valley Council initiated state legislation
which permits cities to pool their resources and redistribute fair share housing allocations in
order to provide affordable housing in the Tri-Valley.
A Tri- Valley Council committee coordinated the provisions and passage of non-smoking
ordinances in each of the member cities (1993).
A Tri-Valley Council committee helped craft the ABAG Platform on Growth Management which
. supports "bottom up" regional planning.
'~.4,:. I
29
~
While there have been disagreements over planning issues in a rapidly developing area, a gradual
building of trust and a record of working together has occurred. It has become apparent that
comprehensive sub-regional planning and Growth Management is important to the future of the
Tri- Valley. There is a growing recognition that it would be beneficial if there were a body in
place to address inteIjurisdictional planning issues.
, -.
'..~) .
30
. f, '.
"
..:
[
....~..I.!...:.).I!::.t,.:.~<t~~..:.. ',:o;;"~" . '.' ",
. .:' ;":;,,::).:.) ;Y."" "", '
. '., '.
f"'" ',"-"'~'
, ~ ic '" ' "'.,' ' .
"
. "' I
-' -.
'," .:.,'
., ';1.
'. .','M , .,
','
- ,"'
..j'
, '~.", "
, ,., ~ S" ,:',' L'
, ' ,
,:' . ;',
,'. .',
'\.',
.......
.::\.,.J,. .,""
- , . '.~
" ".'
, .: ,r _ . : ~'.' " . , '. " , ,
". ~ ~.':: " ~" I',"
~ , r .. ,,:
~ ~ .' ":." ,;" ., ", ,:,',
. .;;: ',~. ."'~ " ,
-.'~.),.;j,;, ,:;~"'" --
'-
menu of subregional
land use policies
Accepted by the Executive Board
Association of Bay Area Governments
March 1994
88
ATTACHMENT 5
_~,.., '-C"""
,
~
Menu of Subregional
Land Use Policies
The following "menu" of subregional land use policies is designed to
encourage consideration of a wide range of possible approaches and policy
choices while allowing them to be tailored to individual subregions.
The individual policies arc intended as generic examples that could be
modified to suit local conditions. Sllb~headings are included for conve-
nience, to group policies that address similar issues. Local officials are
encouraged to mix and modify policies in this menu, and to incorporate
their own innovations in developing a comprehensive strategy that meets
the diverse needs and desires of their subregion.
Policies are arranged in three categories: Basic, Moderate, and Dynamic. The
Basic category presents policies which, if adopted by a subregion, would
ind icate that local jurisd ictions are "on~board" in fostering a comprehensive
conservation and development strategy. The Moderate category includes
policies that would commit localities to pursue innovative approaches to
coordinated conservation and development. The Dynamic category in-
cludes policies that call for a creative and significant commitment to
interjurisdictionalland use coordination.
Developed by the Regional Planning Committee oft/Ie Association of Bay Area Govemments.
For more infomlation, contact Ceil Scandolle at (510) 464-7961,fax (510) 464-7970.
Policy Menus - Introduction
page 1 :
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LOCATION AND INTENSITY OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT 5
Urban Growth Boundaries
Annexation and Urban Expansion
Infras tructure
Land Use and Development Intensity
NA ruRAL RESOURCE PROTECTION AND MANAGEMENT 11
Conservation of Ecological Resources
Preservation of Agricultural Resources
Protection of Community Identity
Air Quality
Water Quality
MOBILITY
19
Transit-Centered Development
Auto-Oriented Development
Mixed Land Use
Non-Auto Use Through Site Design
HOUSING SUPPLY AND AFFORDABlLITY
23
Increasing Housing Supply
Increasing Housing Affordability
ECONOMIC VITALITY
27
Policy Menus - Introduction
page 3
LoeA TION AND INTENSITY
OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT
ISSUES
Addressing the future form of urban development
is key to developing a viable subregional strategy.
By first determining the overall location and inten-
sity of urban development, subregions build a
foundation on which to base other more specific
policies.
OBJECTIVES
There are three main objectives in developing a
desired urban form:
A. Ensure that the cumulative effect of new de~
velopment emphasizes a compact city-cen-
tered subregional pattern to:
a. support existing urban centers, large and
small;
b. improve mobility of people, goods and
information;
c. optimize efficient public infrastructure
which minimizes environmental costs;
d. protect agriculture, open space and other
nahual resources; and
e. support economic activity.
B. Maintain adequate performance standards and
levels of service for infrastructure, amenities,
transportation and public services provided
by municipalities or special districts within
the subregion.
C. Optimize maintenance and use of existing
infrastructure while pursuing more efficient
and less costly technologies.
page 5
Policy Menu 1 - Location and Intensity of Urban Development
Basic
Moderate
Dynamic
POLICIES
The following subregional policies are intended to
achieve an efficient and desirable urban develop-
ment form.
Urban Growth Boundaries
1. Encourage firm urban growth boundaries that
enable achievement of objectives for housing,
jobs and other development and for the con-
servation of agriculture, environmentally sen-
sitive and other open space lands.
2. Encourage urban development inside urban
growth boundaries while discouraging it out-
side such boundaries by establishing develop-
ment incentives and preservation criteria.
3. Establish urban growth boundaries and des-
ignate an adequate amount, range and density
of land use within these boundaries to meet
projected needs.
4. Establish and permit only appropriate land
uses outside urban growth boundaries, possi-
bly including public parks and recreation ar-
eas, open space, privately.operated recreation
areas and agricultural uses.
5. Pursue urban uses near urban growth bound-
aries that are compatible with activities out~
side urban growth boundaries.
6. Establish an urban growth plan for the subre-
gion that defines areas within urban growth
boundaries suitable for varying levels and
intensities of urban development, designates
which development should occur first, and
develops a hierarchy of areas for subsequent
development.
,,-:':, ,'.
':.'j ::
..~ d
'..~~' ;{
, .
,~ ~.:,"
.f'
t-.
~ ~ ~
'" & -.0
'" f'I c'Y
&' 9.' .;:;..
!; () ~~ :f.
f'lO .;!: ,'" "\'
r-,' :::J !; ...
Cr;~""'" ~o c:f ::;0
DODD
DODD
000,0
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 1 - Location and Intensity of Urban Development
page 6
~
~ ,., ~
'", O~ -0
c., 'l7
&' ~ -#
?; (/ C/j.:J f.
nO .;sr ,..... T
ii.... .:J 'S .....
C/j.:J-"" ~o QO :;:?
7. Designate as greenbelt all lands beyond urban
growth boundaries and protect such lands
through open space zoning, joint agreements
and, where necessary, acquisition, to ensure
greenbelt uses are appropriate.
DOOO
Annexation and Urban Expansion
Basic 8. Encourage annexations that conform to an D 0 0 0
orderly expansion of city boundaries within
planned urban growth areas and provide for a
contiguous development pattern.
Moderate 9. Develop vacant or underutilized land within D 0 0 0
existing city limits whenever and wherever
possible, prior to an extension of development
outside of incorporated areas.
Dynamic 10. Establish criteria for evaluating proposed an~ D 0 0 0
nexations of land to cities which assure that:
a. the land is within urban growth bound-
aries;
b. water, sewer, police, fire, and school ser-
vices have adequate capacity;
c. the land within incorporated areas is un-
suitable or insufficient to meet current
land use needs;
d. the land abuts incorporated areas or exist-
ing or planned city streets on at least one
side; and
e. the land is not under an agricultural pre-
serve or open space contract.
1L Work with LAFCO to add the above criteria to D 0 0 0
those required by existing state law.
Infras tructure
Basic 12. Encourage growth to be directed to where D D 0 D
infrastructure capacity is available or commit-
ted including, but not limited to, road, transit,
water, solid waste disposal and sewage treat-
ment.
Policy Menu 1 . Location and Intensity of Urban Development
page 7 ~
Moderate
Dynamic
13. Encourage interjurisdictional cooperation to
eliminate costly duplication of capital infra~
structure, public facilities and services.
14. Encourage cost-effective maintenance of ex-
isting public facilities and services as well as
new investment to keep up with demand and
achieve subregional objectives.
15. Discourage "leap frog" development by pro-
gramming the extension of water and sewer
lines only to areas contiguous with existing
development.
16. Invest in major public facilities and urban
amenities that support the further develop~
ment of urban centers.
17. Ensure that special purpose districts and other
service providers have capacity and will pro-
vide, in a timely manner, necessary services
where the subregion agrees that development
is planned or expected.
18. Pursue efforts to combine special districts to
service subregional areas where efficiencies
will result.
19. Establish and maintain levels of service and
recommended standards for various compo-
nents of the subregional infrastructure. :
20. Phase and limit extension of urban services to
occur only within urban growth boundaries.
21. Identify needed public facilities of regional
and subregional significance, and assure that
new development planning and approval is
accompanied by firm commitments to pro-
vide such infrastructure.
22. Coordinate development of long range poli-
cies and capital improvement programs of all
levels of government and special districts to
ensure that infrastructure and services sup-
port achievement of subregional objectives
through the timely and cost-effective action.
'~'n
b ~
.J? &' -<l
'" n c'J
&' $;' s-;.
?; () CrJ::;' ~
nO .;!;? ,..... "r
n....... ::;, !:; .....
CrJ.:;,..... ~o r::? ':2?
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 1 - Location and Intensity of Urban Development
page 8 .
. ~':~:l . ".~~, _~
!-.
"IJ' ~ ~
.~ & ~
'" C'l (J
& 9..... .;:;,
?:; 0 V;~ ~
~'J't ~~
v;~Q, ~o :::;0 .;f
23. Adopt development mitigation programs to
ensure that new development meets subre-
gional objectives and pays its fair share of the
cost of providing police, fire, parks, water,
sewer and flood control facilities and services.
DODD
Dynamic
Land Use and Development Intensity
24. Encourage employment, commercial, residen- 0 D 0 D
tial and social activities to be located close
together to help contain growth and reduce
the need for travel.
25. Encourage higher density residential devel- 0 0 0 0
opment to be located within convenient walk-
ing distance of downtowns and near major
office developments, retail centers and transit
stations.
26. Establish minimum densities in areas desig- D D 0 0
nated as high density, for redevelopment, and
in areas with existing infrastructure capacity
able to handle growth.
27. Develop incentive programs to encourage in- 0 0 0 D
fill, redevelopment and reuse of vacant and
underused parcels within existing urban ar-
eas.
28. Implement programs to identify and over- D D 0 0
come potential difficulties associated with re-
development and infill, such as on-site toxics
in industrial areas and neighborhood opposi-
tion.
Basic
Moderate
Policy Menu 1 - Location and Intensity ~f Urban Development
page 9
NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION
AND MANAGEMENT
ISSUES
As the Bay Area has grown, so have concerns for
maintaining air and water quality, protecting open
space streams and wetlands, restoring the health
of the Bay, ensuring the availability of land for
parks and wildlife preserves and retaining agri-
cultural activities.
OBJECTIVES
There are six main objectives in protecting natura 1
resources and environmental quality:
A. Preserve environmental resources in order to
maintain and enhance ecological health and
diversity of plant and animal communities.
B. Preserve economically productive lands and
waterways, including crop and grazing land,
forests, and fisheries.
C. Ensure availability of open lands for public
purposes, including recreation and watershed
protection.
D. Create and enhance community identity
through protection of community separators,
hillsides, ridge lines and viewsheds, riparian
corridors and key landscape features.
E. Use conservation of open land to guide needed
and anticipated new development into areas
where it is best provided for, avoiding areas
with high risk of landslide, flood, fire or other
natural hazard.
F. Preserve and enhance air and water quality.
Policy Menu 2 - Natural Resource Protection and Management
page 11 .
Basic
Moderate
(---
POLICIES
The following subregional policies are intended to
improve natural resource protection and manage-
ment.
Conservation of Ecological Resources
1. Inventory and encourage preservation of sig~
nificant plant communities, aquatic resources
and wildlife habitats and movement corridors
as well as significant historic, visual and cul-
tural resources, including views, landmarks
and archaeological sites.
2. Carry out requirements of state and federal
legislation protecting endangered species.
3. Encourage efficient use of existing water sup-
plies, including conservation by urban, agri-
cultural and industrial users, and use of re-
claimed water.
4. Support implementation of the Comprehen-
sive Conservation and Management Plan for
the San Francisco Bay - Delta Eshlary.
5. Pursue programs which identify and protect
the availability of significant rock, sand, gravel
and other mineral resource areas and which
balance their use with ecological conser'vation
objectives.
6. Pursue the use of conservation easements,
density transfer or purchase using in-lieu fees
and dedications in order to preserve open
space that cannot otherwise be protected..
7. Establish a non-profi tland trostto acquire and
preserve open space.
B. Pursue all methods of acquiring land for parks,
permanent easements, and open space pre-
serves that contribute to the subregional open
space network from state and federal govem~
ments, individuals, and foundations.
Policy Menu 2 - Natural Resource Protection and Management
"
J:: !<. ~
.J) & -0
f ~ *~
?;' () ":J:::' <<-
r.o .J? ,'.. '\'
iI..... ::; !;' .....
":J.s" SO c? ::?
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
page 12 :
b ~
. 'tY J' -.0
r7J 'tr
&' ~ ~
l:: () ",.:;, ~
~ :Y ;,'" ...."\'
"'~ ~o .cy :::?
9. Develop watershed management strategies to D D D D
protect, enhance and restore wetlands and
riparian areas, and reduce pollutants and run-
off within the estuary.
10. Promote land use, design, and development D D D 0
practices that minimize pollution and man-
age the flow of storm water and urban runoff
into the Bay and its tributaries.
Dynamic 11. Permanently preserve a continuous system of D 0 0 0
open space adjacent to urban growth bound-
aries, through planning enforcement, joint
agreements and/or acquisition.
12. Develop proposal for new funding for special D 0 0 0
open space acquisition program considering
bonds, parcel, sales and other taxes and fees.
13. Require dedications of all lands needed for 0 D D D
main taining and improving animal movement
corridors and establish zoning to ensure long
term viability of large scale plant and animal
habitats.
14. Require conservation and, where necessary, D D D 0
restoration of all riparian and wetland habi-
tats to support historic levels of wildlife and
plants.
15. Implement land use and transportation pat- D 0 0 D
tems and practices that protect, enhance/and
restore the Estuary's open waters, adjacent
wetlands, uplands habitats, and tributary
waterways.
Preservation of Agricultural Resources
Basic 16. Retain land in large, contiguous blocks of suf- D D D D
ficient size and quality to enable economically
viable grazing or agriculture.
"
Policy Menu 2 - Natural Resource Protection and Management
page 13
Moderate
Dynamic
Basic
,,--'"
I,
17. Discourage actions which would preclude
future agricultural use on agricultural lands
not currently used for farming, but which
have soils or other characteristics that make
them suitable for farming.
18. Proted and enhance the economic viability of
agricultural land by: facilitating preservation
agreements, conservation easements, and
transfer of development rights; establishing
right to farm ordinances; and undertaking
public education about agriculture.
19. Identify and protect any watershed lands that
are part of an agricultural production area.
20. Define agricultural production zones for aU
significant crop and grazing uses and perma-
nently prohibit any development or subdivi-
sion of land in those zones.
21. Establish finn urban growth boundaries and
require the establishment of buffer zones in all
developed areas next to agricultural produc-
tion zones, in order to reduce urban-farm con-
flicts and to clearly signify where urban devel-
opment ends. .
22. Maintain a viable agricultural land market by
limiting future development on agricultural
land to uses and structures necessary for agri-
culturaloperations.-
23. Prevent the transfer of water resources from
agricul tural parcels to urban uses when it will
threaten viable agricultural use.
24. Prevent overdrafting of groundwater.
Protection of Community Character
25. Encourage actions which maintain the integ-
rity of hillside areas as major scenic and natu-
ral resources by limiting development to low-
intensity uses compatible with open space.
Policy Menu 2 - Natural Resource Protection and Management
"
t-,
~ "- ~
'", & -..0
'" .c'l cY
&' 9..'" .:;;:;
't: () c,,:j f-
~ # i;.... ....'\'
V)~ ~o QO :;?
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
page 14 :
Moderate
Dynamic
Basic
Moderate
26. Direct future urban development away from
areas that have steep hillsides and that are
adjacent to major water courses.
27. Define and establish long term planning goals
that encourage large scale urban separators
between communities (which have not already
grown together).
28. Preserve hillside areas of at least 15% average
slope by discouraging higher density devel-
opment, encouraging clustering, requiring
open space preservation and ensuring the pro-
tection of natural features such as trees, creeks,
knolls, ridgelines and rock outcrop pings.
29. Establish a dedication and acquisition pro-
gram to acquire community separator lands.
Air Quality
30. Support the Air District's development of
improved ambient air quality monitoring ca-
pabilities and the establishment of standards,
thresholds and rules to more adequately ad-
dress the air quality impacts of proposed
project plans and proposals.
31. Encourage modes of transportation that mini-
mize impacts on air quality.
32. Adopt air quality policies and programs and
integrate them into local general plans and
implementation mechanisms.
33. Promote ancillary employee services, such as
child care, restaurants, banks, or convenience
markets at major employment centers to re-
duce vehicle trips.
34. Require pedestrian~, bicycle-, and transit-ori-
ented features in new development and rede-
velopment projects.
~
:~ t; ~
... 0 ';{f
rJ R .v
?:; .....cJ v,~ I
~ '$ f:'" ...:'\'
v,~ ~o '00 ::?
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DDDD
DODD
Policy Menu 2 - Natural Resource Protection and Management
page 15
Dynamic
Basic
Moderate
35. Discourage single-occupant vehicle trips
through parking supply and pricing controls
or other similar measures.
36. Preserve rights-of-way and land for station
sites along future transit corridors and secure
adequate funding for transit agencies in the
subregion to make transit a viable alternative
to the automobile.
37. Encourage compact, city.centered develop.
ment featuring amix of uses that locateshomes
near jobs and services to reduce vehicle trips
and vehicle miles traveled.
Water Quality
38. Carry out requirements of state and federal
legislation protecting wetlands; discourage
any filling of wetlands except for small levees,
piers or walkways necessary for public access
or study of the shoreline or baylands.
39. Encourage the preservation of adequate veg-
etative cover and prevent development which
increases erosion and sedimentation potential
along streams or in Wlstable soil areas.
40. Identify, protect and conserve groundwater.
41. Retain natural riparian and stream.side areas
in their natural state to prevent degradation
and provide soil percolation, wildlife habitat,
aesthetic relief, and recreational uses.
42. Improve wetlands protection and the man.
agement and control of urban runoff into the
Bay and its tributaries from public and private
sources.
b ~
. 'tr ol:: -()
i:j' 'b'
& ~ .;:Y
t: () 0.::J ~
f'lo .J1 ,.... '\'
n' .::J f; ....
"'-fJ...... ~o 00 ;?
DODD
DODD
,t
,
J
~
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 2 . Natural Resource Protection and Management
page 16 .
Dynamic
43. Es tab lish actions w hieb protect wa terresources
by:
a. preserving areas with prime soil percola-
tion capabilities and preventing placement
of all potential sources of pollution in such
areas;
b. minimizing sedimentation and erosion
through control of grading, quarrying,
cuttingoftrees, vegetation removal, place-
ment of roads and bridges, use of off-road
vehicles and animal-related disturbances
of soil;
c. controlling pollution from land uses pro-
ducing potentially harmful substances or
contaminants;
d. preventing establishment of excessive con-
centrations of septic systems over large
land areas and mitigating water quality
impacts from existing concentrations; and
e. reducing motor vehicle related pollutants
in runoff from paved surfaces, and in dis-
charges from stormwaterdrains.
44. Enhance and restore wetlands and stream
environments.
~
~ "" ~
.", ~ ~
~ ~ .cY
"" cJ ~ !f
~ c..s 9-
nO .J1 ,... 'r
n.... ~ f; ...
":JS'- ~o ,? ::?
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 2 - Natural Resource Protection and Management
page 17
MOBILITY
ISSUES
Land use is often adapted to the types of transpor-
tation facilities that are available. When the choice
of transportation modes is limited or lacking, the
result can be to hinder or steer development in an
unbalanced or undesirable way. Reliance on the
auto for all trips increases the number of cars on
the road, which in turn increases congestion and
air pollution. .
OBJECTNES
There are four main objectives in providing ad~
equate mobility:
A. Create an efficient cost-effective multi-modal
transportation system by focusing investment
and development in designated transporta.
tion corridors.
B. Integrate land use and transportation plan-
ning in order to ensure land use and support~
ing transportation patterns that facilitate safe,
convenient and reasonably priced mobility of .
people and goods, and increased use of tran-
sit.
C. Discourage long-distance, single-occupant au-
tomobile commuting while increasing resi-
dent access to employment, shopping, and
recreation by transit or other alternatives to
single-occupant vehicle use in order to red uce
congestion, time lost to travel, and air pollu-
tion.
D. Provide more streamlined transit service by
establishing a unified and coordinated transit
network consisting of all transportation agen.
cies in the Bay Area.
Policy Menu 3 - Mobility
page 19
Basic
Moderate
Dynamic
Policy Menu 3 - Mobility
rt; :::$'
."Jj o't; -.0
~ rcr
&' !f- ~
t; () v;::i 9:-
r,O ;sr ,.... '\"
r,...... ::i f; ....
v;S' ~O -00 ::;?
POLICIES
The following subregional policies are intended to
improve mobility.
Transit-Centered Development
1. Encourage transit-compatible infill develop- D D 0 0
ment or redevelopment near transit stations in .
central business districts, and intensify subur-
ban business parks to create effective destina-
tion centers for transit.
2. Promote pedestrian~oriented mixed-use cen- D D 0 0
ters, including residential, commercial and
em p loyment activities, easily accessib Ie by foot,
bicycle, or transit.
3. Promote pedestrian activities in the immedi- D D 0 0
ate vicinity of transit stations by providing
safe, direct, attractive pedestrian access be-
tween transit stations and neighboring devel-
opment.
4. Establish higher residential and commercial D 0 D 0
densities along transit routes and roadway
arterials, near transit stops, transportation hubs
and activity centers, and as part of mixed-use
developments.
S. Establish highest intensity office andpther D D D D
employment uses within convenient walking
distance (1/4 mile) of existing or planned
transit stations or transportation hubs to pro-
mote transit use, optimize transit investments
and reduce the adverse auto impacts of devel-
opment.
6. Designate a hierarchy of housing and com- O D D D
mercial densities that varies based on proxim-
ity to transit stations and corridors, with the
highest densities located within convenient
walking distance of transit stations and bus
lines, and densities decreasing as distance from
existing or planned transit service increases.
:, page 20
Moderate
Basic
Moderate
Dynamic
7. Establish incentives such as sliding scale de-
velopment fee schedules that favor higher
density transit-oriented development in order
to discourage low density sprawl and encour-
age the production of transit-oriented devel-
opment.
Auto-Oriented Development
8. Discourage the development or expansion of
major commercial, office and institu tiona1cen-
ters in areas not adequately served by transit.
9. Discourage projects tha t generate more than a
set threshold of automobile traffic or exceed
certain levels of service on local streets and
arterials in areas not served by existing or
future transit.
Mixed Land Use
10. Encourage neighborhood-serving commercial
uses within walking distance (1/4 mile) of
defined residential areas.
11. Encourage local policies which promote and
do not restrict home-based work opportuni-
ties.
12. Promote mixed-use development that pro-
vides opportunities for residents to live and
work in the same neighborhood or commu-
nity.
13. Facilitate the conversion of undeflised indus-
trial sites for residential, mixed use or live/
work activities
14. Establish small scale neighborhood tele-corn-
muting centers that provide fax machines,
telephones, computers with networkingcapa-
bilities, and other office equipment, allowing
workers to work close to home.
",
!-..
.,!!J "" ~
.~ & .,0
f ~ *'rJ
!: () V:J~ ~
C10 .;sr ,.... 1"
i\..... ~ f:; ....
05" ~o 1::)0 :!
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 3 - Mobility
page 21
Basic
Moderate
Dynamic
~
-& '" ~
',..,. & .,0
~ R .c
1-- cJ :::1:<. ~
"'..... Cij 9;
rP -::If ,'" '\"
C\....... :::r f;' '!<.
Ct:t" ~o .Qo ::;0
Non-Auto Use Through Site Design
15. Encourage transit connections between resi- 0 D 0 0
dential areas, commercial areas, and centers of
employment
16. Encourage bicycle and pedestrian connections D D D D
between employment centers and nearby per-
sonal services such as restaurants, stores, post
offices and banks.
17. Encourage direct, safe and convenient pedes- D D D D
trian and bicycle routes on residential streets
in new subdivisions which provide conve-
nient access to bus and rail service.
18. Promote road networks and circulation pat- D D D D
terns within subdivisions with multiple ac-
cess points and other amenities that readily
accommodate public transportation vehicles.
19. Promote pedestrian and bicycle connections D D D D
within residen tial neighborhoods and between
residential areas and nearby transit stations or
stops, commercial areas, centers of employ-
ment, and schools.
20. Establish design guidelines that emphasize 0 D 0 D
safe, attractive streetscapes in developments
near transit and that maximize pedestrian and
bicycle access to transit'
Policy Menu 3 - Mobility
page 22
HOUSING SUPPLY AND
AFFORDABILITY
ISSUES
The lack of an adequate supply of housing in the
Bay Area is widely recognized. Strategies are
needed to improve the supply and affordability of
needed housing.
A locality that restricts or severely limits housing
may cause spill-over effects into neighboring com4
munities. Greater cooperation between commu-
nities can relieve tensions and serve the larger goal
of providing an adequate supply of housing af-
fordable to all the region's residents.
OBJECTIVES
There are three major objectives in providing ad-
equate housing:
A. Promote fair and equal access to housing for
all persons regardless of race, color, religion,
gender, disability, sexual orientation, age, na-
tional origin, or family status.
B. Strengthen interjurisdictional efforts to en-
sure a fair, equitable and rational distribution
of low-income, moderate-income and special
needs housing throughout the region and sub-
region consistent with land use policies, trans-
portation services and employment locations.
C. Facilitate the development of affordable hous-
ing near areas with superior transit service.
Policy Menu 4 - Housing Supply and 'Affordability
page 23
POLICIES
The following subregional policies are intended to
maintain and improve adequate housing supply
and affordability.
Increasing Housing Supply
Basic
1. Encourage the designation oHand near transi t
for multi-family housing and neighborhood.
serving uses.
2. Encourage the development of special hous-
ing facilities, including small conununity care
facilities for the elderly, mentally disabled,
and dependent or neglected children, in resi-
dential and mixed-use zones near transit and
other services.
Moderate
3. Promote the provision of a range of unit sizes,
types and lot designs in major new develop-
ments.
4. Promote residential development at or above
the midpoint of the designated density range
and discourage development at densities lower
than the minim um density prescribed for each
residential land use category.
5. Promote the development of second units,
and allow shared housing among unrelated
adults in single family residential areas.
6. Designate vacant office and industrial sites for
residential use and encourage the reuse of
older conunercial or industrial buildings for
residential or live-work space.
~
iY :<. ~
.'S 0'" "'0
~ R .(J
()o ~ ;.fi
?; "5 9,.....
r.o ~ ,..... '"\
r........ .::i f; .....
v,:;,....... ~o .cf :!
DODD
DODD
DODD,
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 4 . Housing Supply and Affordability
page 24
7. Promote a variety of techniques for increasing
the supply of housing such as:
a. incentives for development of multi-fam-
ily housing with units large enough to
accommodate families with children;
b. mixed use developments that combine
residential uses with compatiblecommer-
cial and industrial uses;
c. using air rights to construct housing over
parking lots, etc.;
d. minimum density levels;
e. designating land for residential and work-
place mixed use'developments; and
f. incentives and guidelines for construct-
ing residential useS above ground floor
commercial establishments.
Dynamic
8. Establish employer participation programs
and offer incentives to encourage employers
to contribute in some way to housing that is
affordable ,to its workers (sites, fees, actual
units).
Increasing Housing Affordability
Basic
9. Encourage coordinated local effort to jointly
designa te specific si tes, including vacant build-
ings' for the provision of temporary homeless
shelters, transitional housing, and housing for
seasonal workers and to investigate private
and public sources of funding for such facili-
ties.
10. Encourage the development of programs, such
as joint development of affordable units by
two or more localities, designed to provide
housing for very low-, low- and moder\ite-
income households.
11. Encourage the construction and preservation
of second dwelling units in single-family resi-
dential neighborhoods.
~
-& .... ~
.", & -.0
c., f'J. (J
&' 9. ~
1:: () V)~ ~
1'10 .;!: ,.... '\'
r'I....... ~ f:; ....
V).:::,.....!to .c:Y <?
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 4. Housing Supply and Affordability
page 25
Moderate
Dynamic
(~
12. Establish a public/private partnership to en.
sure mutual understanding of subregional
housing needs and practices of the develop-
ment and finance market and to develop ways
to improve housing production and lower
housing costs.
13. Promote programs whereby new residential
projects involving demolition of moderate- or
low-priced single family homes include an
equal number of equivalently priced units in
any replacement development, and ensure
that previous residents are given first priority
for occupancy.
14. Promote the preservation of all existing af-
fordable housing located near transit, and pro-
mote institutional and financial mechanisms
to provide for additional affordable housing
near all transit centers.
15. Promote the use of new manufactured homes
to realize potential cost reductions in housing.
16. Establish an "inclusionary" program whereby
new residential developments must provide a
minimum percentage of units affordable to
very-low or low income households, either on
site or through the payment of in-lieu fees for
the construction of affordable units.
17. Establish housing impact fees on all non-resi-
dential developments including office, retail,
and industrial uses to be used to assist in
providing affordable dwelling units.
t
t
~:
~
~
~ "" ~
.~ o~ ~
'" 'tt
a ~ ~
?:; 0 ",::' f.
~ :i ;;- ~'{'
Vj~ ~o 1:)0 ::;.0
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
Policy Menu 4 - Housing Supply and Affordability
page 26
.~.,-:-
ECONOMIC VITALITY
ISSUES
The entire Bay Area has been hit hard by an
economic slowdown in recent years. Resolving
this problem will depend in part on improvements
in the national economy.
General economic conditions are compounded by
state fiscal policies that cause local jurisdictions to
"fiscalize" land use and compete for revenue-
producing development. Coordinated efforts are
needed to achieve fiscal reform and equitable dis-
tribution of economic opportunity. Other compo-
nents of economic health include providing qual-
ity education, producing affordable housing, in-
vesting in transportation, and maintaining envi-
ronmental quality.
OBJECTIVES
There are three objectives to consider in strength-
ening economic vitality.
A. Retain and allow for the orderly expansion of
existing businesses.
B. Attract new businesses.
C. Offset revenue-driven development through
fiscal reform and interjurisdictional coopera-
tion.
Policy Menu 5 - Economic Vitality
page 27
I
:.!
~
~ "" ~ f:
."" & "0
G:> R (J ,
~ 9. .:.:=; ~;
~ U v,.::y ~ '"
~:,
r
!.f: .J1 ,.... '\' ~:
9; ,:j ;; .... :',
v,.::y ~o :::f :! ;,
i
1'''
POLICIES ![,
:~ "
rF
The following subregional policies are intended to W-
i':.'
maintain and improve economic vitality. ,',
Basic 1. Develop a coordinated subregion.wide ap- D D 0 D
proach to economic development.
2. Encourage economic development which pro- D D D D
vides jobs at all income levels for residents of l
1
the subregion. . ~.
..
3. Develop strategies to retainexisting employ- 0 0 0 0 f;'
ers.
1'.
4. Identify and mitigate, where appropriate, ob- 0 D D D h
stacles to the formation and expansion of local ,.
businesses.
5. Work to remove impediments to gainful em- 0 D D 0
ployment, such as lack of transportation, child
care, job training, vocational education, and
other factors.
6. Improve cooperation between public agen- D D D 0
cies and private sector representatives, such
as chambers of commerce, financial institu-
tions, plant managers and business associa-
tions, in formulating economic development
plans and programs.
7. Cooperate to develop sufficient housing- in a D D 0 D
range of sizes and prices to meet the needs of
workers employed in the subregion and to
ensure that prospective employers have a di-
verse local labor pool.
Moderate 8. Explore special programs, including financ- D 0 D D
ing, to expand and attract small and medium
size firms with good growth potential.
9. Protect existing and future businesses by dis- 0 D 0 D
couraging encroachment by non-compatible
uses in areas designated for commercial and
industrial use.
Policy Menu 5 - Economic Vitality
page 28 .
..
Dynamic
10. Work with local jurisdictions and the business
community to maintain and provide informa-
tion about economic development for govern-
mental agencies and the private sector.
Examples include:
. An inventory of commercially and indus-
trially zoned land and an estimate of its
potential for employment.
. A list of specific businesses and industries
likely to provide jobs for subregional resi-
dents, and strategies for attracting them to
locate in the subregion.
. An analysis of the potentialforredevelop-
ment of marginally developed land or
derelict facilities, and an inventory of sites.
.. Information on existing and pending de-
velopment throughout the subregion for
use by government, business groups and
potential developers.
. Information about public sector financing
to facilitate the location of appropriate
business with a focus on financing trans-
portation, housing and necessary public
improvements.
11. Monitor the absorption and availability of
ind ustrialland within the subregion to ensure
a balanced supply of available land for all
sectors, including industrial suppliers and
services, and periodically assess the need to
designate additional industrial land to achieve
this end. '
12. Identify appropriate sites, provide infrastruc-
ture, and facilitate development of tele-com-
muting centers.
13. Facilitate expansion or, if necessary, reloca-
tion of existing businesses within the subre-
gion.
Policy Menu 5 - Economic Vitality
"
~
.,& "'" ~
.~ ol.:, -.0
'" .n CJ
&' 9:' .::::;
!: () C/j.:::r :J:.
~ '# t ...:\'
C/jff. ~o t::? ~o
DODD
DODD
DODD
DODD
page 29.
Policy Menu 5 - Economic Vitality
page 30
/- .......
.. '
Executive Board
Tom A. Torlakson, President,
Supervisor, Contra Costa County
Peter W. Snyder, Vice President,
Mayor, City of Dublin
Mary Griffin, Immediate Past President,
Supervisor, San Mateo County
Karen Anderson, Mayor, Saratoga
Jane Bartke, Mayor, EI Cerrito
Paul Battisti, Supervisor, Napa County
David F. Berto, Councilmember, Santa Rosa
Brady Bevis, Supervisor, Marin County
Gayle Bishop, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
Richard Brians, Mayor, Dixon
William J. Carroll, Supervisor, Solano County
Rod Diridon, Supervisor, Santa Clara County
Joe Head, Councilmember, San Jose
Trixie Johnson, Councilmember, San Jose
Frank Jordon, Mayor, San Francisco
Barbara Kaufman, Supervisor, San Francisco
Willie B. Kennedy, Supervisor, San Francisco
Mary King, Supervisor, Alameda County
Paul Kloecker, Councilmember, Gilroy
Ted Lempert, Supervisor, San Mateo County
Dianne McKenna, Supervisor, Santa Clara County
Carole Migden, Supervisor, San Francisco
Doris Morse, Councilmember, Millbrae
Frank Pagliaro, Jr., Councilmember, Burlingame
Charlotte Powers, Councilmember, San Jose
Gwen Regalia, Councilmember, Walnut Creek
Kent O. Sims, Mayor's Office of Economic
Planning and Development, San Francisco
Tim Smith, Supervisor, Sonoma County
Ed Solomon, Mayor, Napa
Richard Spees, Vice Mayor, Oakland
Gail Steele, Supervisor, Alameda County
Michael Sweeney, Mayor, Hayward
Lani Valentine, Councilmember, Belvedere
Dene Woods-Jones, Councilmember, Oakland
ABAG Staff
Gal)' Binger, Planning Director
Janet McBride
Ceil Scandone
Bing Wong
Regional Planning Committee
Paul Battisti, Chair, Supervisor, Napa County
Linda Perry, Vice Chair, Coundlmember, San Leandro
Jane Baker, Chair, MTC
Brady Bevis, Supervisor, Marin County
Michael Cale, Supervisor, Sonoma County
William D. Davis, Executive Director, LAFCO,
San Mateo County
Paul DeFalco, public inlerest representative
Ann Draper, Bay Area Planning Directors' Association
Sandra E. (Sandy) EIIes, Coundlmember, Cotati
David A. Fleming, Mayor, Vacaville
Marge Gibson Haskell, economic development representative
Mildred (Millie) Greenberg, Vice Mayor, Danville
Mary Griffin, Immediate Past President,
Supervisor, San Mateo County
Gary W. Hambly, Building Industry Association
of Northern California
Greg Harper, Councilmember, Emeryville
Stana Hearne, League of Women Voters of the Bay AIea
John Holuclaw, Sierra Club
Mary King. Supervisor, Alameda County
Claire L Mack, Councilmember, San Mateo
Jean McCown, Councilmember, Palo Alto
Karin Mohr, Coundlmember, Pleasanton
Larry Orman, Greenbelt Alliance
Jim Pachl, Bay Conservation &
Development Commission
Tom Powers, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
Steven A. Roberti, COLAB and Central Labor
Coundl of Contra Costa County
Guillermo Rodriguez, Latino Issues Forum
Peter W. Snyder, Vice President, Mayor, Dublin
Ed Solomon, Mayor, Napa
William H. Steele, Jr., Chevron, Chair, ABAG Associates
Tom Torlakson, ABAG President,
Supervisor, Contra Costa County
Dezie Woods-Jones, Councilmember, Oakland
Consultants
Institute for Community Planning Assistance,
Sonoma State University
Chandler Lee, AICP
Jason Munkres, Planning Intern
Policy Menus
page 31