Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7.1 Tri-Valley Planning Task Force Study Group CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT/STAFF REPORT City .Council Meeting Date November 10, 1986 SUBJECT: Tri-Valley Planning Task Study Group - Final Report EXHIBITS ATTACHED: (Copies of the Final Report with Transmittal Letter distributed under separate cover. ) RECOMMENDATION: Consider and forward recommendations to the Alameda County Planning Staff. FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None. DESCRIPTION: In February, 1986, the Tri-Valley Planning Task Study Group was formed as an ad hoc committee to review major Tri-Valley area planning issues. The Group has completed its Final Report and has requested the Planning Commission to consider making recommendations to the City Council. On October 20, 1986, Betty Croly, Alameda County Assistant Planning Director, made a brief presentation of the policy recommendations to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission took the Report under consideration, continued the matter, and -asked for Staff comments. On November 3, 1986, the Planning Commission reviewed the Final Report and .directed Staff to submit it along with Staff comments to the City Council for informational purposes without a Planning Commission recommendation. Staff has provided comments on each group of Final Report Policy Recommendations. Staff recommends that the City Council consider the Staff comments and direct Staff to forward recommendations to the Alameda County Planning Staff. Group 1. Agency Roles and Responsibilities STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. Compatible goals and objectives, periodic joint studies, and a central information clearinghouse may be desirable, but a lot of practical mechanics would need to be worked out, such as: - Who would determine whether the goals and objectives were compatible? - How would conflicts be resolved? - How much would the studies and clearinghouse operation cost, and who would pay? Group 2. Population STAFF COMMENTS: Recommend for inclusion in the County General Plan. It would be appropriate for the County to request the State to maintain employment data and to periodically update the County General Plan. _ ------------------------------------- ITEM NO. COPIES TO: Planning Department Group 3. Housing Condition STAFF COMMENTS: Recommend for inclusion in the County General It would be appropriate for the County to encourage housing maintenance as needed. Group 4. Housing Opportunity STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. Encouraging commercial/industrial projects to participate in housing programs, encouraging State and Federal infrastructure programs, educating local residents and businesses regarding-infrastructure, and advanced planning for multi-family and other uses may help expand housing opportunities. Many of the other policy recommendations are compatible with existing Dublin General Plan policies. Group 5. Employment Opportunities STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. Encouraging a variety of commercial/industrial/office uses, and encouraging employment opportunities for all persons may be desirable. Group 6. Commercial%Industrial/Office Development STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. Providing flexibility for a variety of commercial/industrial/office uses may be desirable. Group 7. Public Facilities and Services STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. Focusing on community-level parks, and suggesting that the regional park district use existing parklands, may affect neighborhood parks and have other implications. The Dublin General Plan has a policy regarding additional sources of water supply. Group 8. Transportation STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. While Staff agrees that developments planned for the Tri-Valley will have a significant impact on area transportation facilities, the creation of a new entity might not be the most appropriate mechanism for addressing the problem. A new entity would raise many questions, such as: - Who would participate? - How much would it cost and who would pay? - What authority or regulatory powers would the new entity have? - How would the new entity coordinate with the City, County and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC)? Perhaps alternative mechanisms should be explored, such as City and County-elected officials in the Tri-Valley area forming a group to cooperatively address the transportation problem. -2- a Group 9. Environmental Resources STAFF COMMENTS: Consider. Maintaining vineyards, reviewing agricultural policies, � and establishing standards for quarry uses may be appropriate for the County General Plan. Group 10. Hazards/Public Health and Safety STAFF COMMENTS: Recommend for inclusion in the County General Plan. The policy recommendations are compatible with existing Dublin General Plan policies regarding hazardous materials. -3- ALAMEDA COUNTY. PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 399 Elmhurst Street, Hayward, California 94544 (415) 881-6401 September 24, 1986 Chair and Members City of Dublin Planning Commission 6500 Dublin Boulevard Dublin, CA 94568 SUBJECT: Tri—Valley Planning Task Study Group Final Report Dear Commissioners: The Tri—Valley Planning Task Study Group was formed in February, 1986 on the recommendation of planning commissioners from the cities of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin, Danville, . San Ramon, and Alameda and Contra Costa Counties. The Group met a number of times and has completed its Final Report on major Tri—Valley area planning issues. A copy of the Report is included j with this letter. The Group requests that each planning commission review the Report and consider recommendations to their city council or board of supervisors for inclusion of the Report's goals, findings and policy recommendations in their respective general plans. The Task Study Group Chair, Tuny Dunkley, Alameda County Planning Commission, and Vice Chair, Tony Hurt, San Ramon Planning Commission, and Alameda County Planning Department ' s taff will be available on request to make presentations on the work of the Group and the Report to the commissions, councils and boards. The Alameda County Planning Commission has scheduled this matter for its October 20, 1986 meeting. The group of diverse individuals, including seven planning commissioners, one from each of the participating jurisdictions, seven citizen members, and seven at—large members, had six meetings, including over fifteen hours of discussion, through the Spring and Summer of this year, ultimately reaching concensus on a number of important Valleywide issues, and on a set of policy guidelines to deal with these. These support: improved coordination of planning efforts and programs, and adoption of compatible plan goals ana guidelines; periodic joint studies to monitor ongoing change in the Valley; central clearinghouses to maintain up—to—date data bases; expanded efforts to provide provide an adequate and varied housing supply; flexibility in local plans and policies to deal with potential changes in commercial/industrial/ office market conditions; maintenance and expansion of local, regional, state and federal programs to provide adequate utilities, facilities, and services to serve planned development; and improved agency coordination to minimize hazards associated with the use, storage and transport of hazardous materials. Among the Group's major concerns is the need for a coordinated effort to address and attempt to resolve the valley's serious transportation problems. This top priority issue is addressed by the Policy 8.3.a in the Final Report. Planning Commissioners September 24, 1986 Page 2 The Group urges immediate implementation of this policy through formation of a new Tri-Valley entity to develop a Valleywide transportation plan. Approval of this policy and implementation of this recommendation should be discussed by each planning commission and be also be included on the agenda of the Tri-Valley Planning Commissions November meeting. We have both appreciated the opportunity to participate in this important study, and wish to thank your commission and representatives from your jurisdiction for their support for such a cooperative, Valleywide, endeavor. Very truly yours, TunyWunkley, Chair��� -rONY. Tony Hurt:, Vice Chair TD/TH/BC Enclosure cc: City Council members City staff representatives 1957P C FINDINGS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE TRI-VALLEY PLANNING TASK STUDY GROUP FINAL REPORT August 28, 1986 f TRI-VALLEY PLANNING TASK STUDY GROUP._:.. Planning Commissioners Alameda County Tuny Dunkley, Chair Danville John Wright Dublin Brian Raley Livermore James Perry Pleasanton Larry Lindsey San Ramon Tony Hurt, Vice Chair San Ramon Valley Gayle Bishop Planning Area Citizen Representatives Alameda County Pat Stillman Danville Gene DeBolt Dublin -Ed Chase Livermore Darlene Excell Pleasanton John Ferreri San Ramon Jim Hanafee San Ramon Valley Peter Oswald Planning Area At-Large Representatives Paul Banke Alameda County Farm Bureau Roy Bloss Association for Preservation of Danville Boulevard Earnest Ellis Association for Retarded Citizens, Alameda County Dagmar Fulton Amador-Livermore Valley Historical Society Carolyn Hartshorn Women's Club, C.F.W.C. Beverly Kent Dublin Businessperson Chuck Wiedel Southern Alameda County Board of Realtors STAFF Alameda County Betty Croly, Assistant Planning Director Bill Allin, Senior Planner Contra Costa County James Cutler, Chief, Comprehensive Planning Eric Parfrey, Senior Planner Danville Joseph Calibrigo, Planning Director Dublin Lawrence Tong, Planning Director Livermore Robert Brown, Planning Director Pleasanton Chandler Lee, Principal Planner San Ramon Richard Bottarini, Planning Director INTRODUCTION MAJOR PLANNING GOALS FINDINGS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Agency Roles and Responsibilities 2. Population 3. Housing Condition 4. Housing Opportunity 5. Employment Opportunity 6. Commercial/Industrial/Office Development 7. Public Facilities and Services 8. Transportation 9. Environmental Resources 10. Hazards/Public Health and Safety INTRODUCTION .. While sharing a common heritage and environment, each community in the Tri-Valley area of Alameda and Contra Costa counties has developed individual characteristics which should be preserved and enhanced. Open hills, a view of Mt. Diablo, an equitable climate, are shared by all, but each community has developed its own individual identity. The Tri-Valley area is now and will continue to be subject to significant pressures for growth and development. This growth has the potential for significantly and further altering the area's basic character, and generating impacts, both positive and adverse, that will extend well beyond the limits of individual communities. Coordinated, multi-jurisdictional efforts are therefore needed to assess the Valleywide implications of current and anticipated growth, to identify and define long-term and comprehensive goals and objectives for the Valley, and to establish guidelines and programs to direct future growth and development towards the achievement of these Valleywide goals. To these ends, planning commissioners from the cities of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon, and Danville, and from Alameda and Contra Costa Counties, at a meeting of the Tri-Valley Planning Commissions on February 27, 1986, agreed to the formation' of a task study group to review and prepare policy recommendations on Tri-Valley area planning issues. Fourteen members of the group were named to represent the participating counties and cities, each jurisdiction appointing one planning commissioner and one community representative. These fourteen in turn named seven members-at-large (except Dublin, which appointed the at-large member). The Tri-Valley Task Study Group held six meetings through the Spring and Summer of 1986. It reviewed and then formulated findings and policies pertaining to major planning issues of concern to the entire Tri-Valley area, including the roles and responsibilities of area agencies, population changes, housing needs, employment opportunities, commercial/industrial/office development, provision of public facilities and services, environmental resources, and public health and safety. The Group's overall goals for the Tri-Valley, and its final set of findings and recommendations, presented in the following sections of this report, were approved on August 28, 1986. This report will be referred to the seven planning commissions for review and comment. It is recommended that each consider inclusion of the findings and policies in their local general plans, and so recommend to their respective city councils and boards of supervisors. 1 MAJOR PLANNING GOALS .. To minimize adverse and disruptive effects of growth and development on environmental resources. To minimize potentially adverse effects of environmental hazards. To retain as much of the desirable character of the Tri—Valley area and of its separate communities as responsible growth will allow. To ensure a supply of good quality housing for persons and households of varying lifestyles, incomes, ages and abilities. To promote a variety of employment opportunities. To promote a balance between Tri—Valley area jobs and housing. To ensure efficient provision of public facilities and services to meet the needs of existing and future development. To provide for the equitable distribution of public services and facilities costs and benefits. 2 FINDINGS AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS Each of the following subsections includes: 1) a brief description of each of the the planning issues considered by the Task Study Group; 2) the Group's conclusions as to the status of each issue,. presented as findings; and 3) the Group's proposals for dealing with each issue, presented as policy recommendations. 1. Agency Roles and Responsibilities 1.1 Issues Agency Coordination: Is the current arrangement among local, regional, state and federal agencies acting in the Tri-Valley area acceptable and adequate? If it is not, . how and to what extent can local planning agencies encourage greater coordination? City/County Planning Coordination: How might the cities within the Tri-Valley area and the two counties better coordinate their short and long-term planning efforts? To what extent should the cities and the counties attempt to reach policy consensus on issues of mutual concern? 1.2 Findings 1.2.a There is a need for improved coordination among the various public agencies and organizations acting within the Tri-Valley area: Decisions on development are typically made -autonomously, based primarily on benefits to the decision-making jurisdictions and communities. However, the aggregation of these local decisions may have significant cumulative effects on the Tri-Valley as a whole; The plans, programs and projects of service and other providing agencies are often developed without sufficient consideration of the consistency of these with applicable comprehensive city and county general plans; and While coordination of the activities of public agencies and organizations is currently undertaken in ways that are consistent with legislative requirements and guidelines, improved coordination is urgently needed to deal with the cumulative effects of development, and with ongoing and dynamic changes in social, economic, physical and political conditions. 3 Improved coordination of planning efforts and programs is also important at this time, in that most communities are undertaking reviews of plan policies and proposals in response to these changing conditions. 1.3 Policy Recommendations 1.3.a The counties and cities of the Tri-Valley area should adopt compatible sets of goals and objectives to serve as guidelines to these and other agencies and organizations in the formulation and implementation of plans, programs and projects. 1.3.b The counties and cities of the Tri-Valley area, in coordination with other agencies and organizations, should periodically undertake joint studies to assess and ' make policy recommendations on the cumulative and regional impacts on infrastructure, environmental quality, etc. , of adopted and alternative plans, policies, programs and projects. Existing and potential spheres of influence should be periodically_ reviewed by the County and affected city to ensure compatible plan development policies. 1.3.c Alameda and Contra Costa Counties should maintain central clearinghouses to improve the dissemination of information among agencies acting in the Tri-Valley area. The clearinghouses should serve to: maintain records and periodically prepare summary reports on major projects, studies and reports, plan amendments, legislation, etc. , of local, regional, state and federal agencies; and monitor and periodically report on changes within the Tri-Valley in land use, infrastructure, population, housing, employment, and environmental quality. 1.3.d The counties and cities of the Tri-Valley area should jointly, or through central clearinghouses, prepare, adopt and maintain common sets of basic data, assumptions and projections to be used by these and other agencies. 2. Population 2.1 Issue Population Change: How should the cities and the counties deal with potential quantitative and qualitative changes in population and employment, and with uncertainties and differences in opinion regarding estimates and projections of these? 2.2 Findings 2.2.a There is inadequate information on the characteristics of the 4 existing Tri-Valley population. 2.2.b A wide variety of often-conflicting data and assumptions are currently used in planning studies and project reviews in the Tri-Valley. 2.2.c Dynamic changes in population, in employment, and in land use, transportation, traffic, etc. , warrant frequent and periodic reviews of local general plan policies and proposals. 2.3 Policy Recommendations 2.3.a The State (Employment Development Department) should be requested to maintain and, in conjunction with regional and local agencies, periodically udpate employment data for communities in the Tri-Valley area. 2.3.b Local planning agencies should regularly review and modify their general plans to ensure that these reflect significant ongoing changes in conditions (e.g. , population, employment, traffic, transportation and infrastructure constraints, and environmental 'quality). 3. Housing Condition 3.1 Issue Housing Condition: Are local policies and programs adequate to ensure that the existing-housing stock is adequately maintained? 3.2 Finding 3.2:a Existing city and county programs and regulations are adequate to ensure the maintenance of the existing housing stock. 3.3 Policy Recommendation 3.3.a Local jurisdictions should continue to implement existing housing maintenance programs and requirements. 4. Housing Opportunity 4.1 Issue Housing Constraints: What are the key constraints to new residential development, and to the development of housing which is affordable to all income groups? To what extent can or should local jurisdictions act to minimize housing constraints? 5 4.2 Findings 4.2.a Principal constraints to residential develoment, and to the development of "affordable" housing include: Community and neighborhood opposition to certain residential projects, particularly those proposed within or proximate to established residential areas which differ significantly, in terms of type, density and value, from existing. Community opposition based on concerns regarding potential impacts of projects on the "quality of life" (e.g., transportation facilities, schools, parks, and other infrastructure; air and water quality). Community and neighborhood opposition reflecting concerns regarding the "quality". of new residents. A lack of community understanding of fundamental housing issues and long-term needs and objectives. Constraints due to limited capacity in infrastructure (e.g. , schools, parks and recreation, streets and highways, water supply, sewage treatment/disposal). Community opposition to funding timely improvements to infrastructure needed to serve new residential development. Adopted general plan policies and zoning which restrict the location, density, and phasing of residential development. The cost of money, for financing housing construction and purchases, reflecting national economic conditions and economic policies. Cutbacks in federal and state funding assistance for -� housing, particularly that serving very low and low income households, and other housing needs groups (e.g.,' young, elderly, disabled). The lack of and/or high cost of land for residential development. The limited ability of residential developers to effectively compete with commercial/industrial . developers for available land. City and county policies restricting the amounts of land available for residential development. 4.2.b Community and neighborhood opposition to higher density residential projects, and to other residential projects which differ from the "norm", may be reduced if the appropriateness 6 of these projects, in terms of long-term community objectives, is adequately demonstrated. 4.2.c Within the Tri-Valley area as a whole, there is a good mix of housing, varied as to tYPe,. size, and tenure. However, the cost of most housing is beyond the means of many households (e.g. , entry level, elderly, disabled) wishing to live in the area. 4.2.d At the community level, this mix is less varied. 4.2.e Major commercial and industrial development in the Tri-Valley area is expected to add substantially to the demand for housing here, which demand may be in excess of the housing supply currently planned. 4.3 Policy Recommendations 4.3.a All communities should endeavor to provide a variety of housing, including housing affordable to all income groups. 4.3.b Adequate and- appropriate housing opportunities should be encouraged- for population groups and persons with special housing needs. 4.3.c The cities should offer incentives to projects providing housing to lower income households and to households with special housing needs - e.g. , the elderly, disabled. 4.3.d Major commercial/industrial projects should be encouraged to participate in programs to provide housing, particularly housing that will be affordable to new employees. 4.3.e Where appropriate, surplus commercial/industrial land should be redesignated for residential uses. 4.3.f All communities should encourage the continuation of state and federal housing assistance programs. 4.3.g All communities should encourage the expansion of state and federal programs assisting development of infrastructure required to serve planned development in the Tri-Valley area. 4.3.h All communities should endeavor to educate local residents and businesses to the need for local funding of infrastructure required to serve planned development. 4.3.1 To the extent possible, higher density residential uses, and those differing from the community norm, should be planned as far in advance of anticipated development as possible in order to let existing and prospective residents in adjoining areas know what is planned. 7 5. Employment Opportunity 5.1 Issue Job Needs: Will employment in the -Tri-Valley area provide jobs suited to the needs of the local labor force, and to the needs of the unemployed and underemployed? Can or should local jurisdictions try to encourage commercial/industrial/office uses that will match local employment needs? 5.2 Finding 5.2.a Many major businesses have located in the Tri-Valley area to take advantage of the existing labor market. These businesses are providing a number of new entry-level jobs, improving employment opportunities to many unemployed and underemployed Tri-Valley residents. 5.3 Policy Recommendations 5.3.a Local communities should continue to encourage a variety of commercial/industrial/office uses so as to further diversify employment opportunities for area residents. 5.3.b Local communities should encourage businesses to participate in programs improving employment opportunities for all persons, including those with physical and mental disabilities. 6. Commercial/Industrial/Office Development 6.1 Issue What if? Should local jurisdictions have contingency plans if projected commercial/industrial/office growth does not occur in the amounts, types or rates currently forecast? 6.2 Finding 6.2.a The successful implementation of local plans and capital improvement programs is dependent upon the continued development of major commercial/industrial/office projects, which development will be affected by unforeseen regional and national changes in market and economic conditions. 6.3 Policy Recommendations 6.3.a Local plans and policies should be sufficiently flexible to accommodate a variety of commercial/industrial/office uses, and potential changes in the demand for sites and building space for these uses. 8 6.3.b Where appropriate, surplus commercial/industrial land should be redesignated for residential use. 7. Public Facilities and Services 7.1 Issues Adequacy: Will . existing or programmed infrastructure be adequate to meet current and short term needs of residential and commercial/industrial/ office development? Valleywide/Regional Impacts of -Development: To what extent does development in one part of the Tri-Valley area impact infrastructure elsewhere in the Tri-Valley and region? What, if any, responsibility should local developments/communities have for improving infrastructure elsewhere? 7.2 Findings 7.2.a Most existing infrastructure (e.g. , schools, parks, police and fire protection, wastewater treatment/disposal, streets and highways, transit) will not be adequate to serve projected needs over the next fifteen years. 7.2.b Community-level park and recreation facilities and programs are limited, and are not expected to meet the full range of recreation needs (both active and passive). 7.2.c Too much emphasis has been placed on land acquisition by the East Bay Regional Park District. 7.2.d Local communities face uncertainties regarding provision of future federal and state assistance for local improvements to infrastructure. 7.2.e Developments in one part of the Tri-Valley area have and will continue to impact infrastructure elsewhere in the Tri-Valley. 7.2.f Communities face uncertainties regarding future water supplies. 7.3 Policy Recommendations 7.3.a All communities should encourage the maintenance and expansion of local, state and federal programs assisting development of infrastructure required to serve planned development in the Tri-Valley area. 7.3.b Communities should explore additional sources of water supply, and should implement programs to encourage water conservation. 9 7.3.c All communities should endeavor to educate local residents and ' businesses to the need for local funding of infrastructure required to serve planned development. 7.3.d Community efforts, in conjunction with those of regional, state and federal agencies, should be focused towards the development of community-level park facilities and programs. 7.3.e The Regional Park District should endeavor to make maximum feasible use of existing parklands before purchasing additional lands. 8. Transportation 8.1 Issues Development/Facilities and Services Coordination: _Can or should local jurisdictions coordinate residential and commercial/industrial/office development with the improvements to transportation facilities and services? Rights of Way: Should a number of alternative rights-of-way for possible future roadway and transit facilities be purchased or otherwise protected? 8.2 Findings 8.2.a Planned development in the Tri-Valley area is projected to have significant impacts on the area's transportation facilities. These impacts can be mitigated through facility improvements and through .improved management of the use of - the transportation system. 8.2.b Planned development in the Tri-Valley area will require a number of new facility improvements, many within new or expanded rights-of-way. 8.3 Policy Recommendations 8.3.a As a top priority for the Tri-Valley, a new entity should be formed to develop a plan for Valleywide transportation facilities and services needed to serve planned development. 8.3.b Local jurisdictions should consider adopting performance standards for major developments, setting limits on the impacts that these may have on local and regional traffic conditions. 8.3.c Local jurisdictions should adopt policies and requirements for transportation system management for major developments and 10 employers, encouraging such measures as car and van-pooling, use of public transit, flexible work hours, etc. 8.3.d Tri-Valley communities should develop coordinated traffic monitoring to measure ongoing_.changes in traffic conditions. 8.3.e. Rights-of-way of planned transportation facilities should be preserved and protected. 8.3.f Surplus railroad rights-of-way in urban areas should be protected. Studies should be undertaken to consider the feasibility of utilizing these for public transit, roadway, trailway, and other alternative uses. 9. Environmental Resources 9.1 Issues Agricultural Lands: Can or should local general plans and zoning be changed to protect agricultural lands? How might local policies be changed to minimize disruption to agricultural production as lands are converted to urban uses? Vineyards: To what extent should local policies and programs be changed to protect and allow expansion of the vineyards? Sand and Gravel Resources: What can or should be done to protect current and future sand and gravel operations against encroachment by incompatible land uses? 9.2 Findings 9.2.a Almost all "prime agricultural" land in the area has been developed or is planned for development with urban uses or for sand and gravel extraction. 9.2.b Many farmers and ranchers in the remaining 'agricultural areas are experiencing economic difficulties. Many desire to divide their properties into units smaller than currently required. 9.2.c The vineyards in the Live rmore-Amador Valley provide cultural and environmental benefits to the entire area. 9.2.d Quarries have been designated as regionally significant and should be protected. 9.3 Policy Recommendations 9.3.a The counties and the cities should coordinate their planning 11 r for agricultural areas at the periphery of existing urban development. 9.3.b Communities in the Livermore-Amador Valley should pursue measures which will help to maintain and improve the vineyards. 9.3:c Alameda County should review its Plan policies and zoning requirements for agricultural areas. 9.3.d Alameda County and the cities should continue to establish standards and requirements to minimize conflicts between sand and gravel quarry uses and urban uses, including performance standards and buffer zones. 10. Hazards/Public Health and Safety 10.1 Issue Program Adequacy: Are existing regulations and programs adequate to minimize hazards? 10.2 Finding 10.2.a Existing regulations, controls and programs are adequate to deal with most environmental hazards. An exception is the management of the storage and transport of hazardous materials, requiring coordination of local, state and federal agencies, and fire protection services in some unincorporated areas. 10.3 Policy Recommendations 10.3.a Local jurisdictions should develop programs to minimize hazards associated with the use of hazardous materials in industrial developments. These programs should be coordinated with the efforts of other responsible county, regional, state and federal agencies. 10.3.b Communities should endeavor to improve coordination of protection services, particularly to deal with changing needs and with specific problems such as hazardous materials. 10.3.c Communities should seek improved coordination at the local, state and federal level with agencies responsible for regulation/control of the transport of hazardous materials. 12 1924P