Home > Resource Center > In the News Home > Greenbelt Alliance in the News

Greenbelt Alliance In the News

February 21, 2005

Drawing the line: As deadline nears, prospects dim for cities, coalitions and board of supervisors to forge growth agreement

On Saturday, elected officials from all 19 cities, the board of supervisors and representatives from business and environmental groups will gather in Walnut Creek for a day of political maneuvering no less complicated than a studied game of chess.

The goal is to draw an urban limit line around all the cities beyond which no development will be allowed, except by a to-be-determined process in which the line can be moved in the future if the county needs more land for residential or commercial development.

With time running short and big money at stake, however, several cities are poised to abandon negotiations if they can't convince the rest of the county to include inside the line several thousand acres that are now off-limits to development.

The roadblocks thrown up at the beginning of the talks eight months ago are the same that loom over Saturday's meeting, said Don Blubaugh, the consultant hired to ride herd over the discussions.

"There are really two principal points of view," Blubaugh said. "One is, don't move the line under any circumstances and provide some kind of arrangement to move it in the future. The other school of thought ... says let's put the line where it will ultimately be and then make it difficult to change it in the future."

A few cities -- Brentwood, Antioch and Concord -- want to expand the urban limit line so they can grow into what is now open space or, in Concord's case, unused but developed Navy land. Pittsburg also wants additional acreage included inside the line, but only if other cities are allowed more land.

San Ramon, Clayton and Orinda are also seeking expansions.

"I've predicted that this isn't going to go anywhere because of all the political gamesmanship at play," said Antioch City Councilman Brian Kalinowski.

To take effect, the new urban limit line must win support from 75 percent of the city councils representing 75 percent of the county's population and four of the five county supervisors and then past muster with a majority of voters in a countywide election.

If a consensus emerges from Saturday's meeting, every city council in the county and the board of supervisors will vote on it.

The process was established last year by voter-approved Measure J. Starting in 2009, the $2 billion transportation bond will withhold millions of dollars for street improvements from any city that fails to abide by "a mutually agreed upon urban limit line."

Any city may opt out of the countywide process at any time. Cities that do so, however, must convince their own voters to pass a city-drawn line in order to receive all of their Measure J money. It's money that most cities in this traffic-choked county can ill afford to lose.

So far, the board of supervisors and cities from west and southwest Contra Costa County have approved what has become known as Plan C. It was drafted by a coalition of business leaders, home builders and environmentalists.

Plan C fixes in place the current urban limit line but allows movement every 10 years if a review committee finds that there is not enough land inside the line for 20 years' worth of residential and commercial development. Any changes would be subject to countywide voter approval.

"We have a lot of land in the county that's already urbanized and if we use it wisely, we don't have to expand for the next 30 years," said David Reid of the Greenbelt Alliance, an environmental group that helped write Plan C.

Advocates say that a strong growth boundary will combat sprawl, protect open space and ease traffic problems by redirecting development into existing cities instead of into the open land on the edges of suburbia. While Plan C's opponents don't dispute the claim, they believe that moving the line to include additional acreage won't doom the county to worse traffic congestion or heedless sprawl.

City leaders from Central County are leaning toward Plan B, which would allow some cities to move land within the urban limit line after a few specific road projects are complete. In Concord's case, the city could expand if the federal government releases control of about 1,600 acres on what is now the Concord Naval Weapons Station.

East County's leaders couldn't agree on which plan to endorse as a region.

Brentwood and Antioch support a modified version of Plan B that would require the county to abandon three pockets of developable land in the region. Oakley and Pittsburg support Plan C's call to hold the line where it is now, but Pittsburg could bolt for Plan B if any other city is allowed to expand.

"Plan B ensures there's ... at least some objective improvements we can point to in East County before we would be allowed to move the line," Kalinowski said.

Together, Antioch and Concord can scuttle the negotiations because a new urban limit line requires support from 75 percent of the city councils representing 75 percent of the county's population. Those two cities represent almost 30 percent of the populous.

"If Concord and Antioch are at the table for Plan B, we can at least get some negotiation done," said Brentwood Mayor Brian Swisher. "If Concord decided to make a deal and go for Plan C, then we'll be in trouble."

Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier, whose district includes Concord, said he's willing to find a compromise that brings the city into the Plan C camp as long as the urban limit line doesn't move right away. He also insists that it would only move after a public hearing process and an election.

"Concord is in a position to show real regional leadership and still get, for all intents and purposes, what they want," DeSaulnier said.

Concord Mayor Laura Hoffmeister said she hasn't talked to DeSaulnier about it but expressed some hope that they could reach an agreement.

Still, Concord's position hasn't changed. The city wants the line to move automatically to include its requested acreage if the military ever releases it for public use, Hoffmeister said.

Even if the city locks arms with DeSaulnier and the rest of the "hold-the-line" coalition, the balance of Central County -- Clayton, Martinez, Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek -- could still scuttle the countywide process if they align themselves with Brentwood and Antioch behind some version of Plan B.

"I'll be optimistic on the 27th. There are a lot of things that need to be hammered out still," said the Greenbelt Alliance's Reid. "We'll be there on the 26th and we'll have a lot to say."

If no plan emerges from Saturday's talks, all the cities and the county will have to draw their own lines and persuade their own residents to approve them, which would mean a prolonged, expensive and politically bloody city-by-city fight.

That's a fight that each side believes it can win, which suggests there is little incentive to embrace a compromise for cities that want to move the line and the forces that don't.

Reach Kiley Russell at 925-952-5027 or krussell@cctimes.com.

The long-planned development of Orinda's Gateway Valley is one vivid example of why developers seek changes in environmental impact report requirements.

1985: Contra Costa County embarks on an update of its general plan, a document that outlines what type of houses, shops and businesses may be built and where. A 67-member committee meets weekly for more than two years. County staffers and the committee considered an urban limit line, but the committee later removed the controversial idea.

1988-1990: Environmentalists oppose the general plan and draft a ballot measure that would deeply restrict construction. In response, supervisors devise a competing measure that would establish an urban limit line and restrict urban development to 35 percent of the county's land.

1990: Voters adopt the supervisors' alternative, rejecting the more stringent environmentalist plan. The line to remain in effect, unless voters adopt a new one, until Dec. 31, 2010.

1991: Board of Supervisors adopts new general plan with voter-approved urban limit line.

2000: In response to widespread angst about growing traffic congestion and school overcrowding, the supervisors shrink urban limit line by 15,000 acres, largely in east Contra Costa County.

NOVEMBER 2004: Voters pass a half-cent transportation sales tax that requires every city and the county to abide by a new urban limit line or forfeit their shares of local road-repair dollars. The cities and the county may adopt a single line, if they can agree, or ask each city's voters to OK local lines.

URBAN LIMIT LINE: A TIMELINE

GROWTH CHESS MATCH

The use of the chess pieces is a loose analogy showing power structure. For instance, the voters are the king because they have the final say. The queen is the Board of Supervisors, who have the most power among the political bodies. The bishop isn't as powerful but could play a key role. The rook could make moves on its own. The knights represent less power, but they also have things going on that could significantly affect the outcome. The pawns are getting pushed around by the process.

Contra Costa County and city leaders have embarked on a high-stakes political chess game over growth. At stake is whether the region can craft a single urban limit line that all cities and the county will honor. Proponents of a single line say it represents smart growth because it will direct new homes, shops and businesses into existing communities near transit rather than toward green fields on the urban fringe. If talks fail, each city and the county must adopt individual lines in each community. But to put a single, countywide line on the ballot, the region must attain favorable votes from:

• Three-quarters of the 19 city councils that represent three quarters of the county's incorporated population.

• Four of the five county supervisors

Here's how the game board stacks up as city and county leaders head into a Feb. 26 summit where they will be asked to pick a line:

QUEEN: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

• STRATEGY: Hold the line for 10 years and then review whether the county needs more land for housing and jobs.

• LOWDOWN: Three supervisors -- Mark DeSaulnier, John Gioia and Federal Glover -- have waged relentless campaigns on a "hold the line" platform and show no signs of backing down.

• POWER MOVE: The board holds the greatest power because any two of its members could quash a line they don't like.

ROOK: CONCORD

• STRATEGY: Expand the line into the Concord Naval Weapons Station and take control of an additional 1,507 acres.

• LOWDOWN: Suspicious city leaders view the move as pre-emptive strike against the county, which might attempt to develop the land for itself.

• POWER MOVE: It's the largest city in the county and with Antioch almost certain to bail from a countywide line, proponents of a single line need Concord's vote. The city and county are negotiating a possible settlement, where the city agrees to wait on a line shift if the county makes certain assurances.

ROOK: ANTIOCH

• STRATEGY: Expand the line 890 acres on its southwest border into Roddy Ranch where it wants to build expensive, high-end housing around a golf course.

• LOWDOWN: The city is still furious with the county over its 2000 decision to shift the line and exclude Roddy Ranch.

• POWER MOVE: Go it alone. The city figures it has a better chance of convincing Antioch voters of the need for Roddy Ranch than it does the rest of the county.

BISHOP: OAKLEY

• STRATEGY: Hold the line.

• LOWDOWN: Oakley wants to annex the Cypress Corridor, an adjacent unincorporated area inside the urban limit line where the county has already approved thousands of houses. Supervisor Federal Glover has said he will support the annexation, but not if Oakley seeks to expand the line.

• POWER MOVE: Support the county's "hold the line" position and potentially tip the vote in favor of a single line. Even if Antioch, Brentwood and Pittsburg bail -- they represent 23.5 percent of the vote -- Oakley's population is large enough to save the line.

PAWN: PITTSBURG

• STRATEGY: Hold the line.

• LOWDOWN: The city wants to annex property inside the urban limit line along its northern border near the river. Glover has agreed to support the move, as long as the city doesn't move for a line expansion.

• POWER MOVE: Agrees to stick with the line unless other cities win expansions. If that happens, it wants to add 1,813 acres.

PAWN: BRENTWOOD

• STRATEGY: Expand the line 1,671 acres on two properties, a third of the land it lost in its planning area when the county shrank the line five years ago.

• LOWDOWN: Brentwood wants the county to get out of its backyard and let it move ahead with its general plan. Its leaders have criticized the county roundly for its development decisions and say the city will do a better job.

• POWER MOVE: Demand the county shift outside the urban limit line some 6,400 acres under county control in east Contra Costa County to prove that it has no development intentions. Otherwise, this city will go it alone. Like Antioch, they figure they have a better chance to persuade their voters than those of the entire county.

PAWN: CLAYTON

• STRATEGY: Expand the line 66 acres to accommodate parcels split by the line and the city's adopted Marsh Creek Specific Plan.

• LOWDOWN: Clayton has become the symbol of the sanctity of the urban limit line as county officials argue that the city has other remedies to resolve the situation.

• POWER MOVE: Pester until someone gives in just to shut them up.

KNIGHT: ENVIRONMENTALISTS

• STRATEGY: Hold the line for 10 years, then review the county's housing, jobs and transportation picture. If conditions warrant and voters agree, the line moves.

• LOWDOWN: Environmentalists view the urban limit line as a critical tool to shift growth away from open space on the urban fringe and into existing communities.

• POWER MOVE: Satisfy us or we'll fight you at the polls.

KNIGHT: HOME BUILDERS AND BUSINESS LEADERS

• STRATEGY: Hold the line for 10 years, then review the county's housing, jobs and transportation picture. If conditions warrant and voters agree, the line moves.

• LOWDOWN: Home builders hope the countywide review process, which does not occur today, will help the region stop fighting over whether to build and start debating over where to build. Business leaders worry about the lack of affordable housing, growing commutes of their workers and the cost of gridlock on their business operations. They also funded the campaign for Measure J, the half-cent transportation sales tax that mandated the creation of urban limit lines. One election is cheaper than 20.

• POWER MOVE: Brokered an unprecedented alliance with environmentalists in the hopes that its compromises would inspire elected officials to do the same.

KING: THE VOTERS

• STRATEGY: Wait and see what leaders deliver to the ballot. It could be one countywide line or a line in each city, and that doesn't count the potential competing lines placed on the ballot if special interest groups dislike what the elected officials propose.

• LOWDOWN: Based on public angst over traffic gridlock, voters are likely to support less rather than more growth. But at some point, could the shortage of affordable housing tip the scales?

• POWER MOVE: Vote

###