01 9-02-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

footage. Mr. Tasano said staff has found that once someone moves into a single family home, regardless of the size, the number of trips produced is only slightly affected. Councilmember McGovern questioned whether the City was therefore encouraging larger homes as a result of this, and City Manager Fialho noted that under the proposal, affordable housing units are not assessed a fee at all, but Councilmember McGovern reiterated her concern. Mayor Hosterman opened the item to public comment. Scott Perkins, Chair, Tri-Valley Transportation Council, emphasized the Council's regional nature and work on transportation issues in the Tri-Valley, said Pleasanton has multiple needs and residents who work outside the city, there are numerous office parks in Pleasanton with 20,000 to 30,000 employees coming in and out of the city everyday who use the regional infrastructure, as well as many retail establishments. Their businesses rely on employees and supplies being able to use regional transportation facilities. He discussed the Tri-Valley Transportation Council's goals, said the first nexus study was adopted in 1990 that looked at a variety of projects which were funded through the fee structure and he said more than $30 million has been put into projects in the Tri-Valley, and they feel a greater contribution needs to be made. Mr. Perkins noted that the fee is a burden on the development, but the development creates a burden on the community. The fee structure is done through analysis of trips which are linked. All but two of the List A and B projects are primarily in Alameda County area, with only two projects in Contra Costa County on each of the two lists, and more than 90% of the funds are in the Alameda County area and immediately adjacent to Pleasanton, which comes right back into the city's neighborhoods. He spoke regarding small versus large home construction and believes people will not build because fees would go, for example, from $2,000 to $4,200. He noted the fee over time will collect about $390 million should the plans be approved and the fee will help with matching funds for regional projects. Mayor Hosterman closed public comment. Councilmember Sullivan supported the recommendation, and noted the struggle with development paying its own way to mitigate impacts while balancing it with economic viability in the Tri-Valley. However, the impacts from not building the projects such as hours of delay over a 30 year period does not help that much, so it is a lot of money for a relatively small improvement. But, when combining monies from other state or federal funding programs, the effect is positive. In addition, all cities in the Tri-Valley are represented and all must agree with this, and while it is not perfect, it is a good compromise for the region and urged the Council to approve it. The real discussion will come later in determining which projects are built first, and the Council will be having those discussions. Councilmember McGovern said List A has State Route 84 on top of the list. She questioned if List A would get done prior to List B. Councilmember Sullivan said they were successful in keeping List A as the highest priority projects, which is identified in the action plan of the Tri- Valley Council. Councilmember McGovern said she would support the request, was glad to have List A as the priority and when the City raises its own fees, it should look at what we do with traffic impacts. Vice Mayor Thorne agreed with Councilmember Sullivan's comments, said he attended a meeting after the nexus study was prepared and felt it was remarkable that all entities have agreed and supported the resolution. City Council Minutes 9 September 2, 2008