Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08021988 - 2.6 2.6 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on August 2, 1988 , by the following vote: AYES: NOES: (See Below) ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Sanitary Landfill Site Measures for the November Ballot Supervisor Torlakson convened this portion of the Board meeting relative to sanitary landfill issues. Supervisor Schroder absented himself from discussion and voting on this matter because of a possible conflict relative to a business association. In accordance with the instructions of the Board on July 26, 1988, V. J. Westman, County Counsel, provided this day for consideration the proposed ballot text for the two advisory ballot measures (proposed Bay Pointe Sanitary Landfill site and the proposed Central "Super" landfill site) and the' two initiative measures (East Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill and the Marsh Canyon Sanitary Landfill) . (Copy attached and included as a part of this document. ) The Board considered the ballot text for the advisory measures on the Bay Pointe site. Supervisor McPeak advised that the language provided by County Counsel takes into account all the procedures of the application process including the Environmental Impact Report process and the review of regional bodies that have to provide permits. Supervisor Fanden moved that the Board approve the text of the Bay Pointe advisory ballot measure as presented by County Counsel. Supervisor McPeak seconded the motion. Fred Caploe, attorney representing the City of Pittsburg, 2530 Arnold Drive, Suite 360, Martinez, 94553, advised the that City of Pittsburg is not in favor of the Bay Pointe site. Supervisor Torlakson then called for a vote on the motion: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, McPeak NOTES: Supervisor Torlakson ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder Supervisor Torlakson then requested the Board to consider the ballot language on the proposed Bailey Road/Kicker Pass (Central Super) site. Supervisor Fanden advised that she would vote to approve placing the Bailey Road/Kirker Pass site on the ballot. However, in addition to the Supersite, Supervisor Fanden advised that she would be willing to compromise by adding as a fifth measure on the ballot the Kirker Pass site as it was proposed to the Planning Commission. She noted that Land Waste Management, the applicants for the Kirker Pass site, adherred to the planning process including appearing before the County Planning Commission. Supervisor Fanden then moved the Bailey Road/Kirker Pass site (Super Site) and the Kirker Pass site (separate from the Super Site) as a fourth and fifth ballot measure respectively on landfills. Supervisor Powers seconded the motion. Supervisor McPeak clarified that the Proposed Bailey Road/Kicker Pass Landfill site would have no refuse vehicle access to or from Kirker Pass Road or Railroad Avenue and that there would be no working face on the Kirker Pass site. Supervisor Fanden described the location of the proposed supersite. She noted that a part of this site has had some environmental review and that it would be subjected to additional review procedures. She reaffirmed that there would be no refuse vehicles on Railroad and no working face on Kirker Pass. She noted that her reasons for the fifth site have already been stated above. After brief discussion the Board agreed to vote separately on the two landfills. Fred Caploe received clarification from Supervisor Fanden relative to a boundary of the supersite. Supervisor Fanden advised that if this landfill is approved by the voters, it will still be subjected to the review process. t Tom Stewart, representing Land Waste -Management and the Kirker .Pass site, 560 Railraod Avenue., Suite 204, Hercules, advised that his client would accept the proposal that combines the two sites, restricts access, and prohibits a visible working face, and that any other modification of that would do damage to their property and interests. He stated that if the Board is going to be equitable, the Board should place before the voters the Kirker Pass site as it was initially presented. He noted that the application of his client has withstood the challenge of the environmental review process, noting that the application has been recommended for approval by County staff and the County Planning Commission. Everett Jenkins, representing the West Contra Costa Solid Waste Management Authority, 2600 Barrett Avenue, Richmond, commented on the need for the Board to take action on the proposed landfills that have been presented to the Planning Commission, the Solid Waste Commission, and the Board of Supervisors. He expressed concern that the initiative process will not necessarily be decided upon by the best information presented but probably upon emotionalism. He noted that there is not the same amount of information on the Bay Pointe site, the Marsh Canyon site or even the super dump site as there is on the two sites that have gone through the application process. He commented onithe costs which will be incurred by. the proponents of the various sites in disseminating information to the electorate. In conveying the concern of the Authority, Mr. Jenkins advised that the Board should reconsider its position on the initiatives with regard to making a decision on the proposed landfill sites that have been presented to the Planning Commission and the Solid Waste Commission. . Board members discussed points made by Mr. Jenkins. Supervisor Torlakson advised that he would be interested in putting on the ballot some specific language that may assist in creating a political consensus or put support behind locating regional sites, perhaps in West County as well as one in the San Ramon Valley area. Supervisor Powers commented on the cost factor in developing landfill sites including the lengthy process involved in securing the required permits and certification from local and state agencies. Supervisor McPeak expressed support for the effort Supervisor Fanden has made in development of ballot language ,to provide for public or private ownership of landfill sites. She expressed a desire to have this same language included in the !Bay Pointe site as well. Supervisor Fanden responded that she would have no objections. Supervisor Torlakson then called for the vote on the supersite (Bailey Road/Kirker Pass) . AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, McPeak NOES: Supervisor Torlakson ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder Supervisor Fanden then moved that the Kirker' Pass Landfill site as presented to the County Planning Commission and approved by the County Planning Commission, be placed on the ballot as an advisory measure. She advised that the ballot language should follow the pattern of the Bay Pointe and supersite. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Powers. Supervisor Fanden amended her motion to reflect that access would be Railroad Avenue off Kirker Pass Road. Supervisor Powers agreed to the amendment. Supervisor McPeak advised that she would not; vote for the motion. She commented on the distinction betweenithe Kirker Pass site and the Garaventa site which she did support putting on the ballot because the Garaventa site qualified as an jnitiative petition. Supervisor Torlakson called for the vote on. the motion. AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden NOES: Supervisors McPeak, Torlakson ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder Board members discussed the order of the advisory measures on the ballot and agreed to Bay Pointe being listed as the first advisory measure followed by Central Super. Mr. Stewart received clarification that the ballot language "no working face on the Kirker Pass site" means no dumping on the Kirker Pass site. He advised that by its action the Board converted the Kirker Pass site into an open space corridor. He stated that to preclude from consideration by the voters of this County the Kirker Pass site, is an injury not only to the applicant but the citizens in this County. He advised that the Bailey Road/ Kirker Pass site is unacceptable and if subsequently implemented by the Board of Supervisors would substantially deprive his client of valuable property rights as well as would deny Land Waste Management of any use to the Kirker Pass property. Mr. Steward then read a letter from Cohen and Hsu, legal Counsel for Land Waste Management. David Tam, Chair, Solid Waste Subcommittee, San Francisco Bay Chapter of the Sierra Club, spoke on the appropriateness of having the Kirker Pass site before the voters in some form. He commented on recycling efforts. All persons desiring to speak having been heard, the Board concluded its discussion on this matter. thereby certify that this is a tale and c4r"c+.^c r-it an action taken and entered on the rnlr otos o. :..a, Board of 5upervisQrs on the date shown. ATTESTED: PHIL BATCH OR, Clerk of the Board cc: Elections of Supervisors and County Administrator Director, Community Development County Counsel By -- -= Deputy � [Co.Counsel 8-1-881 f� DRAFT ADVISORY MEASURE FOR COMBINED KIRKER AND CENTRAL "SUPER" SITE 1. Shall the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed ( Insert Namel landfill site (generally located between Pittsburg, Concord, Bailey Road and Kirker Pass Road) provided the site is approved by all appropriate regulatory agencies, meets all environmental standards, has no refuse vehicle access to or from Kirker Pass Road,' and no sanitary fill within 3000 feet. of Kirker Pass Road: 2. Shall the Board .of Supervisors approve the proposed (Insert Namel landfill site (generally located between Pittsburg, Concord, Bailey Road and Kirker Pass Road) provided the site is approved by all appropriate. regulatory agencies, meets all environmental standards, has no refuse vehicle access ,to or from Kirker Pass Road, and no working face or excavation visible from Kirker Pass Road? 3 . Shall the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed (Insert Namel landfill site (generally located between Pittsburg, Concord, Bailey Road and Kirker Pass Road) provided the site is approved by all appropriate regulatory agencies and meets all environmental standards? DRAFT ADVISORY. MEASURE FOR BAY POINTE Shall the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed Bay Pointe Sanitary Landfill site (south of Highway 4 and bordering the eastside of the Concord Naval Weapons Station) provided the site is .approved by all appropriate regulatory agencies and meets all environmental standards? .' . NORTH CENTRAL COUNTY r PROPOSED LANDFILLS Port Chicago Highway �;�• . Sp \ T � north ` willow Pass Road 1"= 4000' State Highway'4 - \Z; / / 1 t 1 1 / .............................................:..........................:.......................... ........ / 1 / / 1 1 \ f \ 1 \ 1 _ 1 1 I / ........:.::::::... :.... ........... ......... . 9.?.;»:;::.»)::::o-:}):o)));:•)})::o:•;)::.v:........:a:c:o::.::::::::o-:::;•;:a:.:no-;:i':;S:i;:k:Giii:ii)::. ........... \ ':...< .._.:...:.::;:.:,.:,: / / 1 I \ ....................::::::::. •::::::::::::•:•:,�::::::,moi::• i:.}y}vMrr::"•);;}::}iii}ii)`::i:4) .t:4• wl 1o ! \ I / I \ f Ly t{. 1 art,. }Y 1 h. �•b• 1 Sye i\ t..• s,. I / •:ti j: I N I\ ............ . ............... r f 1/� t { i 'F I i'::G.'•<::;;;::;::;::i::::i;`;:::}y;;s;:::v;:;:::i':::k:.'?::;:2:::>S�fii:x;::'::'t:`'.":;:2;::::i;:;:.`::::. y.. r t \/ \ 1 / � T :.:xs:;• :?`:;:::;::: +:5i :k f::�%:: :;`.;2sis2iS'v;£::;:i:l!<y:2i:'#:$ii5>:::: ::>:,. 1\ \ / f \ Y� i r v. •:i J •i c_. 7 r..• r4' i .•r :w -1 1 dj.. .R • 1 ':1•a 4'• R Fy t fl♦ ;'? ,'<{;��:;: ::..i$'�;:: _ a 4; LEGEND CITY LIMITS .`' AY POINTE SITE 4CO_.._• r Ir L SITE .....:...... .:..: . . . . ..:. ... . .::....... .. >:... ELLER SITE TE K IRKER SITE PG & E and Right of k'