Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08071990 - 1.11 c TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: August 7, 1990 SUBJECT: Conditions of Approval - Subdivision 6356 SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: APPROVE compromise agreement regarding conditions of approval for subdivision 6356. II. Financial Impact: Approximately splits the difference between what the developer believes his obligation is for off-tract improvements and what County staff believes that obligation to be. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: In 1983, the County approved RZ 2552 and subdivision application 6356 near the corner of Cypress Road and Highway 4 in the Oakley area. The development was proposed by the Hofmann Company. The proposed development consisted of 149 dwelling units and two commercial sites. This development took place before any area of benefit or traffic mitigation fees were established in the Oakley area. The conditions of approval, however, did require the construction of two off-site traffic signals and appropriate intersection widening and channelization at the intersections of Highway 4 and Cypress Road, and Almond Tree Land and Highway 4, the latter being a new intersection constructed as a part of the improvements for subdivision 6356. The residential portion of the subdivision is now nearing completion, but no application has been received for development of the commercial parcels. Design work has been completed for the signal at the corner of Cypress road and Highway 4, and the necessary Caltrans encroachment permits have been obtained. The County is very anxious to have this signal system installed due to the heavy traffic at this intersection, but the developer is delaying the construction due to a dispute over the conditions of approval. Continued on Attachment: x SIGNATURE: r _ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON AUG 7 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED V' OTHER _ VOTE OF SUPERVISORS t/ UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: 7MW:djh I hereby certify that this is a crus and correct copy of an action taken anc entered on the minutest of the c:agenlbo7.t8 Board of Supervisors on the date shown. Ori 'r: Public Works Admn. ATTESTED: AUG 1990 g ( ) PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board cc: County Administrator of Supervisors and County Administrator P.W. Road Engineering �J , A P.W. Engineering Services , P.W. Accounting County Counsel Hofmann Company August 7, 1990 Board Order Subdivision 6356 Page 2 The Hofmann Company contends that the enumerated conditions of approval for subdivision 6356, including the improvements and signalization at Cypress Road and Highway 4, were for the entire parcel, including the two commercial lots, and that development of the commercial lots will not require additional off-tract mitiga- tion measures or area of benefit fees for roads. County staff contends that the conditions of approval for subdivision 6356 were for the residential lots only, even though the commercial lots were a part of the subdivision, because no specific development of the commercial lots was proposed at the time of the subdivision and therefore the necessary level of mitigation was not then known. A thorough search of the Public Works and Community Development files has failed to turn up any document which clarifies the intent when this subdivision was processed in 1983 . The closest thing to an explanation is perhaps contained in a memo from the Public Works Department to the Planning Department, dated ' June 9, 1983 . The first two sentences of the third paragraph indicate that planning staff has advised that the applications under consideration are for the residential proposal only, and that plans and details for the commercial development will be submitted and processed at a later date. The County staff position relies heavily on this paragraph to support their case that the conditions of approval apply only to the residential development. Further on in the same paragraph, however, is a sentence that indicates that the residential development must be compatible with the commercial uses, and therefore the traffic impacts will be examined with both commercial and residential being considered. The developer, therefore, uses this very same paragraph to support his contention that the conditions of approval included consideration of the commercial development. Due to the urgent need to proceed with the construction at Cypress Road and Highway 4, the Public Works Director met with Ken Hofmann on July 11, 1990, in order to try and resolve the conflict. The improvement plans which the Hofmann Company has prepared for the Cypress Road at Highway 4 intersection include both the intersec- tion work and signalization required of his conditions of approval, valued at $278, 000, and additional work along Highway 4 which Public Works staff requested that he include as a part of his project, valued at $158, 000. The funding for this additional work requested by the County was to be paid from Oakley Area of Benefit fees. According to Hofmann's position, he will build the project, the Oakley Area of Benefit will reimburse him for $158, 000, and he will then have completed his off-tract road obligation for both the residential and commercial portions of subdivision 6356. Under the Public Works' staff position, he would build the same project and receive the same reimbursement from the Oakley Area of Benefit. The difference would be that improvements would be credited only as an obligation of the residential portion of subdivision 6356, and when the development of the commercial parcels occurs, the developer would have to pay the current commercial area of benefit fee, or construct an equivalent value of off-site road improve- meets. Considering the size of the parcel, a development of approximately 100, 000 square feet would be reasonable, and the current fee is $3 . 41 per square foot, for a total potential fee in the neighborhood of $341, 000. A lengthy discussion of the 1983 correspondence did not provide any agreement as to which position was correct. I therefore sought some compromise solution that would be somewhere in between the desires of the two parties, be fair to both parties, and most importantly allow the construction of this much needed signal project to proceed. The compromise reached was for Hofmann to immediately proceed with the Cypress road signal project, as August 7, 1990 Board Order Subdivision 6356 Page 3 designed, including both the work which was his obligation under the conditions of approval for subdivision 6356, as well as the work requested of him for the Oakley Area of Benefit and for waiver of the area of benefit reimbursement of $158, 000. The Oakley Area of Benefit thus has $158, 000 which can be reprogrammed to other priority needs, the value of the improvements which Hofmann is putting in for subdivision 6356 is increased by $158, 000 more than he feels he is obligated to pay, and the County concedes that the off-tract mitigation requirements for the commercial parcels at such time as they develop have been met by the work presently being done at Cypress Road and Highway 4. The County thus loses the potential for a development fee of approximately $340, 000. I believe this compromise is fair and equitable to both parties, since it approximately splits the difference between the developer' s position and County staff's position, and most importantly it allows the very important project at the intersec- tion of Cypress Road and Highway 4 to be constructed immediately. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: The Cypress Road-Highway 4 improvement project will continue to be delayed pending a resolution of the debate between the developer and County staff concerning the intent of the conditions of approval for subdivision 6356,or the County would have to take over and construct the project itself, and then take legal action against the developer's bonding to recover its costs.