HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07201999 - D3 Contra
• Costa
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS °'�, ®ernln+► County
FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP �'o•
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SrA (cf—
DATE: July 20, 1999
SUBJECT: Hearing on Recommendation of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission of a Proposal to Rezone a 19-acre Parcel from Exclusive
Agricultural, A-20, to General Agricultural, A-2, in the Tassajara area
(County File #RZ983062) (DK Associates - Applicant; John & Debbie
Pereira - Owners)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Adopt a motion to:
1 . Find that the proposed A-2 zoning is consistent with the
general plan policies applicable to the subject site.
2 . Approve the rezoning of the site to General Agricultural, A-2 .
3 . Introduce the ordinance giving effect to the aforesaid
rezoning, waive reading and set forth date for adoption of
same.
4 . Direct staff to post a Notice of Determination with the County
Clerk.
FISCAL IMPACT - None. The applicant is responsible for all
application processing costs .
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On July 15, 1998, the applicant filed related applications to allow
the subdivision of a 19-acre property along the west side of Finley
Road opposite the Old Tassajara School House. The site essentially
occupies a section of an east facing hillside. Tassajara Creek
also flows through the site. One of the applications was for a
four-parcel subdivision of the property. The submittal also
included an application to rezone the site from Exclusive
Agricultural, A-20 (20-acre minimum parcel size) , to General
Agricultural, A-2 (5-acre minimum parcel size) . The site is
designated Agricultural Lands on the general plan.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
ACTION OF BOARD ON July 20, 1999 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED XX OTHE
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED the public hearing was OPENED; no
one desiring to speak, the hearing was CLOSED; and the above
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS recommendations are APPROVED. (Ordinance 99--32)
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
XX UNANIMOUS (ABSENT #4 TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Bob Drake [ (925) 335-12141
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED jui y 2n , 1999
CC: DK Associates PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
John & Debbie Pereira THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
County Counsel 1 AND O TY ADMINISTRATOR
B '` DEPUTY
c : \wpdoc\rz983062 .bo
RD\
t
Hearing on Rezoning File #RZ983062
DK Associates - Applicant;
John & Debbie Pereira - Owners
Tassajara area
Some time after the applications were filed, the applicant elected
to modify the site plan to:
• reduce the number of proposed parcels from four to three
(minimum 5-acre parcel size) ; and
• modify the site plan to provide a public trail along the
creekside.
Pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act, staff conducted an initial study which concluded that
the project would not result in any environmental impacts, and
proposed that a Negative Declaration determination be made for the
project. The CEQA finding was posted and otherwise circulated as
required by law.
Hearing by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
The project was heard by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission on May 5, 1999 . Staff advised the Commission that
approval of the project would not result in any additional
development. Each of the proposed parcels presently contains a
residence. Also, each of the parcels would contain a safe building
site, away from creek embankments and outside of documented
landslide areas.
Immediately prior to the hearing, to address the concerns of Save
Mt. Diablo, the applicant agreed to provide a blanket scenic
easement over the entire subdivision except for specified building
sites and roadways.
Applicant Consents to Restrict Further Subdivision of the Site
As part of the scenic easement, the applicant also consented to a
deed restriction to prohibit any further subdivision of the parcels
which would be created by this project.
After conducting a hearing, the Commission voted 3-1 to recommend
approval of the A-2 rezoning to the Board of Supervisors, and to
approve the subdivision project contingent on approval of the
rezoning application by the Board.
Discussion
No one appeared in opposition to the project at the hearing. Save
Mt. Diablo had another commitment and was unable to attend the
hearing. Save Mt. Diablo indicated to staff that if the measures
they were seeking were included in the subdivision approval they
would not oppose the project and would not appeal the subdivision
approval.
No appeal has been filed on the Commission's approval of the
subdivision, which has been finalled. Consequently, only the
rezoning action is now before the Board of Supervisors. The
Commissioner who opposed the project was concerned that allowing A-
2 zoning on the west side of Finley Road would create an
undesirable precedent that might encourage more parcelization of
rural ranchettes in the area. Other commissioners felt that the
various conditions included in the subdivision approval would lead
to greater regulatory protection of the site than presently exists.
Based on the review of staff and the Commission, the proposed
rezoning should be authorized.
-2-
z
Hearing on Rezoning File #RZ983062
DK Associates - Applicant;
John & Debbie Pereira - Owners
Tassajara area
CONSEQUENCES OF A NEGATIVE DECISION
Were the Board to deny this rezoning, there would be two immediate
consequences. First, the site would remain zoned A-20, which would
not allow any subdivision of the site. Secondly, the applicant
would not be able to exercise the approval for three parcels which
was granted by the Commission.' In this circumstance, the
applicant would continue to have a 19-acre parcel with three
residences on it. No hillside protection deed restrictions would
be established on the property.
'That approval was made contingent on approval of the A-2 rezoning.
-3-
i
RESOLUTION NO. 18-1999
RESOLUTION OF THE SAN RAMON VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION,
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THE
REZONING OF APPROXIMATELY 19 ACRES FROM EXCLUSIVE AGRICULTURAL,A-
209 TO GENERAL AGRICULTURAL,A-2,COUNTY FILE#RZ983062,IN THE TASSAJARA
AREA(DK Associates-Applicant; John &Debbie Pereira-Owners.
On July 15, 1998,concurrent applications were filed by DK Associates-Applicant,and John
and Debbie Pereira- Owners, with the County of Contra Costa affecting a 19-acre parcel to:
• rezone the site from Exclusive Agricultural, A-20,to General Agricultural, A-2,File
#RZ983062; and
• subdivide the site into four parcels,File#MS980013;
Subsequent to filing the application,the applicant modified the site plan for the subdivision
application to reduce the number of proposed parcels from four to three;
On April 14, 1999, after conducting an initial study which concluded that the project would
not result in any significant impacts, the Community Development Department posted a Notice of
Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for purposes of compliance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, and otherwise distributed the notice as required by law;
On May 5, 1999, after notice was issued as required by law, the two applications were heard
by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission; any person interested therein was afforded
an opportunity to testify;
At the hearing, the applicant consented to the establishment of a scenic easement (i.e.,
conveyance of a grant deed of development rights to the County)across the hillside portion of the site,
outside of the building envelopes,driveways,and roadways,including a restriction that would prohibit
further subdivision of any of the parcels that would be created by this project;
The Commission having fully considered and evaluated all evidence and testimony submitted
in this matter.
RESOLVED, that the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission:
• ADOPTS the proposed Negative Declaration determination for this project for
purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act;
0 RECOM 1ENDS APPROVAL to the Board of Supervisors of the proposed rezoning
of the site from Exclusive Agricultural, A-20,to General Agricultural, A-2;
Resolution No.18-1999
RZ983062
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
0 APPROVES the proposed minor subdivision application for three parcels subject to
conditions including a requirement that the approval is contingent on final adoption
of the proposed rezoning by the Board of Supervisors;and
• FINDS that the proposed rezoning and subdivision applications as conditioned are
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan, including the Agricultural
Lands land use designation for this site, and the Rural Residential policies in the
Conservation Element;
The decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission was given by motion
of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission on May 5, 1999 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners - Pancoast,Matsunaga, Couture
NOES: Commissioners - Gibson
ABSENT: Commissioners - Matsunaga,Mulvihill,Neely
ABSTAIN: Commissioners - None
SCOTT COUTURE
Chairman of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission, County of Contra Costa, State of
California.
I,Dennis M.Barry,Secretary of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission, certify
that the foregoing was duly called and approved on May 5, 1999.
ATTEST:
Dennis M. Barry, AICP, Sec etary
San Ramon Valley Regiona Planning Commission,
County of Contra Costa,
State of California.
CAwpdoc\rz983062.res
RD\
Page 2
1
Findings Map
+ + A-80 + + t
+ + °+ +
A 3 �....+......r A.
SCHOOLAo
A•3 .
+
aye, A.
A-40
N
Rezone From AZO To A•2 DA IAV t LLA: Area
1, '�►. Cy td T tit R-e . Chair of the San Ramon Valley
Planning Commission, Contra Costa County, State of California, do hereby
certify that this a true and correct-copy of B3&s (A--a4 o F
TNt C.buk- TY S 1978 7_QM j W C-j Malz-
indicating thereon the decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission in the matter of tC �5 �.�ATES �.ly C.
_RZ 8►30"
ATTEST:
A
Secretary of the San Ramon Val ey Regional
Planning Commission, State of California
ORDINANCE NO.___
(Re-Zoning Land in the
Danville Area)
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows:
SECTION I: Page U-20 of the County's 1978 Zoning Map (Ord. No. 78-93) is
amended by re-zoning the land in the above area shown shaded on the map(s) attached
hereto and incorporated herein (see also Community Development Department File No.
RZ983062 .)
FROM: Land Use District -A-20 ( Exclusive Aju icultural
T 0: Land Use District A-2 ( General Agriculture
and the Community Development Director shall change the Zoning Map accordingly,
pursuant to Ordinance Code Sec. 84.2.003.
SECTION II. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage,
and within 15 days of passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors
voting for and against it in the
a newspaper
published in this County. ,
PASSED on by the following vote:
Supervisor A_y e N o Absent Abstain
1. J.Gioia ( ) ( ) ( ) { )
2. G.B Uilkema { ) ( ) ( ) ( )
3. D. Gerber ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
4. M. DeSaulnier ( ) ( ) ( ) { )
5. J.Canciamilla ( ) ( ) ( ) { )
ATTEST: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator
and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
Chairman of the Board
By . Dep. (SEAL)
ORDINANCE NO. _
RZ983062 Pereira
Ms. Esther Fultz Mr. & Mrs. Arne Haughland Mr. &Mrs. Walter Bell
1431 Finley Road 1530 Finley Road 1430 Finley Road
Pleasanton CA 94588 Pleasanton CA 94588 Pleasanton CA 94588
Mr. & Mrs. Ron Steward Mr. &Mrs. Stephen Bode Fakhry Kawar
5200 Old School Road 1450 Finley Road 1170 Tournament Drive
Pleasanton CA 94588 Pleasanton CA 94588 Hillsborough CA 94010
Mr. &Mrs. Dennis Dobbeck Mr. Donald Rees
1500 Finley Road PO Box 2667
Pleasanton CA 94588 Olympic Valley CA 96146
RZ983062
Board of Supervisors
7/20/99
Agenda Items #6 & 7
Community Development Contra Costa County
SAN RAMON VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMNIISSION
Wednesday, May 5, 1999 - 7:30 p.m.
Pereira Property
I. INTRODUCTION
DK ASSOCIATES (Applicant), JOHN& DEBBIE PEREIRA(Owners)
The project consists of two related applications described as follows:
A. County File#RZ983062 - A request to rezone approximately 19.3 acres from
Exclusive Agricultural, A-20, district to General Agricultural, A-2, district.
B. County File#MS980013 - A request for vesting tentative map approval to
subdivide 19.3 acres into three parcels.
The subject site is located at #1505 Finley Road in the Tassajara area. (CT 3551.03) (ZA:
U-20) (APN 220-100-005)
II. SUMMARY OF REVIEW
The proposed subdivision and rezoning are consistent with the Agricultural Lands
designation for this site in the General Plan. Each of the proposed parcels would be
consistent with the minimum dimension requirements of the proposed zoning and would
provide a reasonable future building site away from potential creek and soil stability
hazards as conditioned. Each proposed parcel already contains an existing residence. An
existing caretaker mobilehome on the site should be removed, and other deed
notifications/restrictions imposed to satisfy County ordinance and policies.
III. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a motion to:
A. Approve the Negative Declaration for purposes of this project's compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act.
B. Adopt the recommended findings including that the proposed rezoning and
subdivision are consistent with the general plan.
File#RZ983062&#MS980013
C. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors Approve the proposed rezoning from
the Exclusive Agricultural District, A-20, to the General Agricultural District A-2.
D. Approve the proposed subdivision subject to attached conditions including a
requirement that approval of the subdivision is contingent on Board approval of
the proposed rezoning.
IV. GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Environs - The site is located within a box canyon through which the headwaters
of Tassajara Creek pass. East of the site are a series of one-acre country estate
homesites along Old School Road. Elsewhere, the land largely consists of larger
ranch lands up to 300 acres in size. A new trailhead to Mount Diablo State Park
has been developed at the north end of Finley Road.
B. Site Description - The approximate rectangular-shaped site fronts on the west side
of Finley Road immediately across the street from the old Tassajara School House.
It occupies a section of Tassajara creekbed and the east-facing side of a hillside
above and to the west of the creek. The site contains two conventional (stick-
built) houses, and two mobilehomes. The oldest residence lies in the narrow strip
between Finley Road and Tassajara Creek. A newer conventional residence is
located near the northwest corner of the site at a ridgetop location. The change in
elevation from the lowest point (southeast corner at the creek outlet, 710 feet)to
the highest point (northwest corner at the top of ridge, 950 feet) is approximately
240 feet.
The section of Tassajara Creek contains a canopy of mature oak trees along the
length of creekbed. Except some areas immediately next to the creek, the site
largely consists of sloping terrain with the steepest gradients approaching 50%
(V:H).
C. General Plan - The site is designated Agricultural Lands (minimum 5-acre parcel
size required).
The Open Space Element of the General Plan provide for pedestrian and
equestrian trails along a north-south alignment in the vicinity of the project [see pp.
9-30 (Figure 9-6) and 9-34 (Figure 9-7) in the General Plan].
S-2
Pereira Property
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
May S,1999
D. Location Relative to Urban Limit Line - The site lies within the Urban Limit Line.
The Board of Supervisors' policy provides that a subdivision within this area shall
be heard by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission.
It should be noted that last month, the Board of Supervisors directed staff to
initiate a study to consider relocation of the urban limit line. If ultimately adopted,
the proposal would place this site and nearby property outside the ULL. The
application has been filed in accordance with existing open space policies that
apply to this site.
E. Existing Zoning- Exclusive Agricultural, A-20 (minimum parcel size- 20 acres).
F. Previous Entitlements - The site has obtained a number of entitlements in the past.
1. Temporary Caretaker Mobilehome Permit [File#2130-86(A)] - In 1986,
the current owner applied for and received approval of a land use permit
for a temporary caretaker mobilehome.
2. Land Use Permit for Mobilehome Residences for Family Member and
Agricultural Workers (File#2013-9 )- In 1993, the current owner applied
for a land use permit for a mobilehome to house agricultural workers and a
mobilehome for a family member. Information in the staff report for this
earlier application indicates that the mobilehome for the caretaker would be
used for the family member, which is located along the creekbank.
The permit was initially approved by the Zoning Administrator, however,
Save Mount Diablo appealed that approval to the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission. The Commission basically sustained the
Zoning Administrator's approval. Again, Save Mount Diablo appealed the
Commission's decision to the Board of Supervisors. However, before the
matter was decided by the Board, Save Mt. Diablo and the applicant
resolved their differences, and Save Mt. Diablo withdrew their appeal (see
attached Board Order dated January 24, 1994. In so doing, the
Commission's previous approval became final.
The final permit provided for the following:
• The mobilehome for agricultural employees would be a
"permanent" mobilehome with a permanent foundation and
designed to resemble a stick-built residence (refer to COA#5). The
S-3
File#RZ983062&#MS980013
County refers to this type of dwelling as a"manufactured"
residence.
• The approval was conditioned on the removal of an existing
mobilehome which was occupied by agricultural employees (see
COA#6).
• The approval was conditioned on the applicant providing a deed
notice that the residence was to be used for agricultural housing
only (see COA#3).
0 The approval was conditioned to require the applicant to dedicate a
"floating" trail easement along the creek to the East Bay Regional
Park District (see COA#10).
The mobilehome for agricultural workers has been established along the
northern property line, west of the creek (and west of the caretaker
mobilehome). The family member mobilehome still is present along the
west side of the creek, adjacent to the northern property line.
G. Flood Hazard Status - Based on documentation developed by the applicant, the
Federal Emergency Management Agency has indicated that no portion of the site is
subject to a 100-year flood hazard.
H. Permit Streamlining Act Considerations - The applications were originally filed
with County on July 15, 1998. Shortly thereafter staff notified the applicant that
additional information was required on the minor subdivision application. The
applicant made subsequent submittals. That application was accepted as complete
(by default) on February 3, 1999.
V. PROPOSED PROJECT
A. Proposed Division - The applicant is proposing to divide the 19 acre site into three
parcels ranging in size from 5 - 9 acres. The division would establish a private
road within an existing driveway that provides access to the owners' residence on
Parcel A, at the top of the ridge.
Each of the proposed parcels contains an existing residence, however two parcels
have potential for development of new residences. Parcel C has an old residence
between the creek and Finley Road. The applicant has identified an alternative
building site on a secondary ridge on the opposite side of the creek. The slope on
S-4
Pereira Property
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
May S,1999
this portion of the site is less than 20% and is not within an active landslide area.
Were this proposal approved by the County, a future owner of this parcel could
replace the existing residence with a residence at the alternative site.
Parcel B contains the two residences (manufactured/mobilehome) approved by
Land Use Permit File#LP2013-93. Presumably, a future owner would wish to
establish a residence not limited to use by agricultural employees. The applicant
has identified a building site on the west side of the creek, next to an existing barn
for this parcel where the terrain is relatively flat.
Each parcel is proposed to obtain domestic water from wells and dispose of
sewage with septic systems.
The proposed subdivision has been reviewed by a geotechnical firm. Their report
has identified two significant slides on the property. However existing and
proposed building sites avoid those slides. The report indicates that the proposed
development is feasible from a geotechnical perspective.
It should be noted that the project also appears to protect the future development
potential of Parcel A, the 9- acre ridgetop site. The tentative map provides for a
52-foot wide access consistent with County road maintenance standards, and two
utility easements along northern and southern boundaries which might
accommodate water or sewer lines if such services become available in this area in
the future. Conceivably, they might also accommodate drainage lines for urban
level growth. These components of the site plan are not inconsistent with
agricultural policies; however, neither should it be assumed that their provision
assures that future development can be accommodated as may be envisioned. The
merits of any future development would have to be considered when it is
proposed.
B. Proposed Rezoning - The proposed development would not be consistent with the
existing zoning. In this regard, the applicant has concurrently filed for rezoning to
the General Agricultural, A-2 zoning district, which allows parcel sizes as small as
five acres.
C. Dedication of Creekside Trail Easement - One of the conditions of approval of the
land use permit for the agricultural employee housing (File#LP2013-93), provided
for the dedication of a "floating" creekside trail easement to the East Bay Regional
Park District (COA#10). For reasons that are unclear, the trail easement was
S-5
File#RZ983062&#MS980013
apparently not conveyed to the District before the mobilehome was placed on the
site.
The current site plan provides for a proposed 10-foot wide creekside trail
easement which staff understands has been coordinated with the park district.
D. Scale Reduction from Initial Submittal - The initial subdivision application
proposed four parcels, which the applicant subsequently modified to the current
proposal which reduces the number of parcels to three.
VI. AGENCY COMMENTS
A. County Geologist - The County Geologist has indicated that the applicant's
geotechnical report is acceptable for purposes of considering approval of the minor
subdivision, but recommends that additional study be undertaken prior to issuance
of a building permit for a new(replacement) residence on Parcel C.
B. East Bay Regional Park District - The District has indicated that it is satisfied with
the trail easement dedication information provided by the applicant and does not
object to the processing of the subdivision application. Provision for inclusion of
the proposed creekside public trail easement is included in Condition of Approval
#10.
C. Other Agencies - Responses to the project have been received from the San
Ramon Valley Fire Protection District, San Ramon Valley Unified School District,
the Health Services Department, Environmental Health Division, and the City of
San Ramon, none of which have indicated any problem with the project.
A copy of the applications was also forwarded to the private group, Save Mt.
Diablo, shortly after they were received by the County. To date, staff has not
received any comments from that organization.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is subject to the review requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA). An initial study was conducted on the applications which concluded that the
project would not result in any significant environmental impacts, and recommends that a
Negative Declaration finding be made for purposes of compliance with CEQA. On April
14, 1999, staff posted a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Negative Declaration for this project.
S-6
Pereira Property
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
May 5,1999
The public comment period on the adequacy of the Negative Declaration extends to
Tuesday, May 4, 1999.
At the time of the issuance of this staff report, no comments on the adequacy of the
Negative Declaration determination have been received.
VIII. DISCUSSION
A. Relevant General Plan Policies - Listed below is a selection of general plan policies
that have relevancy in the review of this project.
Land Use Element
Any subdivision of lands shall include conditions of approval which
conform with the requirements of the "Ranchette Policy,"which is outline
in the "Agricultural Resources"section of the Conservation Element.
Conservation Element
8-w ...Agricultural/Open Space subdivisions are considered a long-term,
rural/residential use of the land. Parcel size shall be a minimum of S
acres in lands designated Agricultural Lands....
...Parcels shall be reasonably free of hazards, including, but not limited to
flooding and high landsliding susceptibility.
8-cd Design discretionary projects so that structures and roads are not located
on slopes of 26 percent or greater. This requirement is not intended to
preclude existing parcels as building lots if Health Department and
Building Inspection Department requirements can be met.
8-90 Deeded development rights for lands within established setback areas
along creeks or streams shall be sought to assure creek preservation and
to protect adjacent structures and the loss of private property.
B. Consistency with General Plan Policies - The proposed parcels and proposed
zoning are consistent with the Agricultural Lands policies of the General Plan.
Before a parcel map could be recorded, the recommended conditions would
require that the applicant satisfy the rural residential development policies of the
S-7
Fife#RZ983062&#MS980013
Conservation Element. The applicant would have to demonstrate adequate water
supply for each parcel; feasibility of on-site sewage disposal; and provision of
fencing for new residences to contain domestic animals(refer to COA #11 &
9.E.).
The proposed building sites are located away from potential hazards associated
with landslides and potentially unstable creekbanks. Nonetheless, in order to find
the project consistent with Conservation Element Water and Soil Resource
policies, project approval should be conditioned on the applicant:
• Conveying a grant deed of development rights covering the creekbed
within the structure setback area specified in Chapter 914-14 of the
Subdivision Ordinance(refer to COA #28).
Designating a building site on each parcel on the proposed Parcel Map
which would not exceed two acres in area(refer to COA#5). Future
residential development would be confined to those building sites.
C. Compliance with Proposed Zoning- The configuration of Parcel A is irregular due
to the inclusion of the private road as a fee strip within the boundaries of this
ridgeline,parcel. However, all proposed parcels meet the minimum parcel
dimension requirements of the proposed A-2 zoning.
The Commission has legal authority to approve the minor subdivision application,
however, the final decision on the rezoning application must be made by the Board
of Supervisors. The recommended conditions of approval provide that the
subdivision approval would be contingent on the Board of Supervisors approval of
the rezoning application (refer to COA #2).
D. Deed Notification of Agricultural Are - In accord with the Right To Farm
Ordinance, the staff recommendation provides for a deed notification to
prospective buyers of the parcels that the area is located within an agricultural
area, and is subject to related impacts (refer to COA O.D.). The ordinance
provides a grievance procedure in the event that future residents should find that
agricultural operations in the area pose a nuisance.
E. Road and Drainage Improvement Considerations - The attached conditions of
approval include road and drainage requirements, and are based on the revised
vesting tentative parcel map received by the Public Works Department on March
291, 1999. The applicant should be fully aware of the County Ordinance Code
requirements as they pertain to this development. The following issues should be
considered with this project.
S-8
Pereira Property
San Ramon [alley Regional Planning Commission
May 5,1999
1. Frontage Improvements: This parcel is developing to its highest
potential under the current zoning; frontage improvements along Finley
Road will be required. However, the applicant may enter into a deferred
improvement agreement for the required frontage improvements until such
time as they are needed for public safety or orderly development of the
area.
2. Private Road: This property-is located in a Moderate Fire Hazard State
Responsibility Area, and is subject to the requirements in the Policy on
Private Rural Road Design Standards and the Policy on Rural Driveway
Design Standards as approved by the Board of Supervisors on May 2,
1995. The existing driveway does not meet these standards with regard to
width, grade and surface. Significant portions of the road are steeper than
the maximum 16% percent allowed by the adopted policy, and portions are
steeper than the 20 percent allowed as an exception to the policy.
The portion of the road serving more than one parcel will be subject to the
Policy on Private Rural Road Design Standards; the applicant will be
required to lower the grade to meet this policy. The portion of the road
above this point (and the required turn-around) will be considered a
driveway and be subject to the less restrictive Policy on Rural Driveway
Design Standards. The applicant will be granted an exception to the 20
percent maximum grade requirements for this driveway portion, subject to
the review of the San Ramon Fire Protection District, the California
Department of Forestry, the Public Works Department and the review and
approval of the Planning Commission.
3. Street Lights: The property owner will be required to Annex to County
Service Area L-100 Lighting District prior to filing the parcel map. This
annexation process may take 4 to 6 months to complete, as it is subject to
State Proposition 218 requirements and requires a special election.
F. Impact to Existing Trees - Most of the site contains grasslands, however, the
creekbed area consists of a canopy of indigenous trees (largely mature oak trees).
The balance of the land is also studded with mature oak trees. The proposed
building sites and road improvements would not impact any of the mature trees on
the property.
S-9
File#RZ983062&#MS980013
G. Existing Mobilehomes - Family member mobilehome permits are normally allowed
on only a temporary basis. Unless the applicant can provide evidence that the
there is need to have the family member mobilehome, it should be removed as
provided in Condition#14.
It is reasonable to expect that a future owner will wish to establish their own
mobilehome on the site. From staffs standpoint, any new residence should either
require removal of the existing agricultural employees residence (and a new deed
notice that indicates that that residence has been removed) prior to final inspection
of a new residence, OR obtaining a new land use permit from the County for an
additional residence on Parcel B. Refer to COA#15.
H. Police Service Mitigation and Park Dedication Fees -For minor subdivision
applications, it is the County practice to require payment a condition of approval
of a one-time-only police service mitigation fee at time of issuance of a residential
building permit. The fee is placed in a trust fund for Sheriffs Office capital
expenses.
By ordinance, the County is authorized to receive payment of an in-lieu park
dedication fee at time also at time of issuance of a building permit.
At the same time, it has been the County practice to waive the fee where a new
residence is replacing an existing residence on the same parcel. In view of this
practice, it would not be appropriate to consider application of a police service
mitigation fee on Parcels A or C insofar as they both contain residences which do
not have occupancy restrictions.
However, it would be appropriate to require both a police service mitigation fee
and a park dedication fee with a new residence on Parcel B whether or not the
existing residence for agricultural employees housing is removed (refer to COA
#12). First, the only residences on that parcel have occupancy restrictions; second,
staff can find no evidence that either fee has been paid in the past for the existing
residences.
I. Development Restrictions on Future Replacement Residences - To assure
compliance with water runoff(NPDES) regulations, the applicant should be
required to provide a deed disclosure to require that any new residential
development provide appropriate design to assure that runoff will not pollute the
creek(refer to COA #9.F.).
S-10
Pereira Property
San Ramon galley Regional Planning Commission
May S, 1999
J. Required Findin s for Approval - Neither the proposed rezoning nor subdivision
applications may be approved unless the County finds that both are consistent with
the goals and policies of the general plan.
Based on the foregoing review including the attached recommended conditions of
approval, staff concludes that such a finding is reasonable.
IX. ALTERNATIVE ACTION
In the event that the Commission is unable to find that the project would be consistent
with either the goals or policies of the general plan, then the Commission could consider
modifications to the project which would allow the Commission to render a plan
consistency finding.
Possible Use of a Scenic Easement - If the Commission felt it appropriate to better assure
protection of the hillside areas, a blanket scenic easement (grant deed of development
rights) restriction could be imposed on the hillside and ridgeline areas of the site for which
no development is proposed (e.g., building envelopes, road right-of-way). Attached is a
model scenic easement which the Commission has reviewed which might be used for this
purpose. A scenic easement would give the County discretion on placement and design of
an agricultural structure (shed, barn, stable) if proposed outside of the recommended
building envelopes.
Staff has elected not to recommend such a restriction insofar that as of this time, the
property remains within the Urban Limit Line, and such a grant deed of development
rights to the County might be construed as being inconsistent with the current General
Plan policy.
c:\wpdoc\m s980013.rpt
RD\
4/24/99
S-11
M
f
f /
l l U �f
6,4
ri
it
00
, , 7 1
AVA
J i, �'.••, •�„'.•• -- / /moo
v
AS x a
k .y }]1.1• .4 ;, Q?I I'.�.�'' See W-19
i\'
co
CL
ai
am
77
-•I
N F
• N1 wiNno:
oy I
CIS
a� cqIlona
sMj I N
4]1M/J 1
M i
� I
0o '
a c
cqo
1 ti r
Zr t •; 61n
�S:tri:�#.J. � .•• � "yJ�'•'' .` 1 � 1
rr- rr _ - _�� U 0.1Vl. TAX CODE AREI
-2 2 P"M.'2! 3,4. 4-27-72
�- 45P.M.37 a 38 �5: 741PLS. !k-_?�1
3-53 P.M.43 & 444-13-77 M6, 9:� 7�
-67LSM8 6-20-60
04
-9 28 28 1127
33 33411134
• O�
• ?„( j .e VD�.
ia� 2 AA
AI`
low
PB.
-tit 42'�2 is r "324b �r1�lo s- `
WIT { i t
15.8 rAC
.c N�sN OS �L.•t_+
4t
. to
f<
t 4?QI e C" M•S A` 3 J
14
••"-`•-.`, n.rirrc. P1}
A&f / 57/7
4,14
noc
3 1 1(27
6 �n 16�-� - 11251029
+iw-
7s ASS[
'� Za�o•�7 �.
BOQ
2 CONTRA Cts;
4 K.. A tbw f'.� �+•' .R `• E 42E
F. rL t
" Lon
• 1 t .. •:4 _•%�•` t f p+v' +�i s i i a�oliieoouulrese. �• r e < y�{ 151 !
UAC
$i !•p''■}��\•77 Z. ' .:� 1 `'••,w. 4"� 'f'"�Ia«j+� i oLorso •LEON
�' , •�� • i =31TAO AS,IS
vv-
a1NOC«IO +r 1 K r,�.. • .^w.••7• _i t �✓ �'�•�\ _ '•�`•
ai4.ra K ♦� • }, .R •N.4•� ,� • a/MOC«ia *� ros11[rT
s.r• 1 i s41.Q A... s!•.)a K
•way 7 3 t i t'• , :%1'
`� •1 i!a`
9*TArQLLS
CU.Al. ` • t. rEN00 ZA ''j '••I•••'`.1 t,P 6
660 K C'j •. , •• , . �'`• '•♦,\
�•. u •as4 M' •
.+
^tq.H M
--------
•if._ .• �rNKc E; \ Y.'O 6 A N E R R I ? O\R Y t
Iao At `
+ !Iso K r0N•A•+
ON
�`-•
'• :}. ••ERErNOLL1 -s/NOC«r0 ` ' t rOR•.r; ro«a Ar
1 SyJ+A tYY.AL >► / ' Iosa[t
awlo M 1� xi K 9 w• { 1 )!o Ac 1 Ito M,% 9pasa14n 2�`s{ /
~. ± ' ' t40 M ••' / •S••♦ yJ `•:\ i 1244•[..
TS
/+•• l ' l r , 'N_' sxANIMAE VOIS,Solt
^�t�c
rAN � ♦`,``+4.t PUNA `+ N;w�ryG. w.r T.
666 ' �." %•+ !•T.f•acIt ; -
j ;,Lr 2139
+city •�-...�.../ �'� i ='•...•s ,♦J� � ;E 44_44.\ % ,,�. � ,"'
♦K !fG"C {![RTANO ! •• rIMOAM,r ' OC«eARTx l AL / •+ ... ` a •♦,•
![O �� . - t / ra y
:ae 66a.It K
801013"ALL IT At
_L ;� 1 . • ` ;rollRrs ?13w 'u•oox
fir----- .--- �.a s ac, , ',
• •. _ -� � .1�,. .. �' `t 4444... �i •! ,
Knob Pt � OENTA�MOI� •�� � 4444 1 a �' ':i,"r...:
166.66 K K -dvsg%DEV ON
• 1 r
- S, �- --------- -- -
ty•'•is.4f.K Iso AC •'w„ L ._ __ 1,; / ' V t..
�L { JON[!•O.EYLjQiYENT W ',� '- —� } • *•' l
}' It coocKew- C.� T r[ONr
21 '•:b ','22 t �( �23 cA4ZA a' �� srlrli; `.
f sso Ac }
�a✓r.t� "�{' = rACNCN f z Onto*Pt i��'}:a� 710{t ' l 7sa.ac K ` ab ac`•°•.• •` N.N'Yc
40 Ac IS Ac
j KI St
00
flimor
» T }.; i `•`M' 1 \ i ' NUNLz 040
r l 1 aso Ac
166.{Y AS: % •s tlL )•t�IR'K.F+ 1 r, clsa«rwr •'i
/ roLn :v "aN K • + ......•••r
•J f �`, 1 i NOK 1 �` : ; (j� . 4��. • �'�'t1w�
VAB a2"1
'4. ��/ {. 1 •e_..w 'i•/1 cANANA ,�♦ •• a al{'"
.� �. 1, ;�' ,,✓ j
___ ;•4444. ,,
it* Ac
FOLEY
xse.NAc• ♦*L[r •OUZA e (Ir10 K ,•"ttroRT«r i:••• %
r•alll la01•K ,:/� 'b�..s.i!Alf
I.
Ac MASSE
t ' 32 = I ' ♦,�, y/...1 %4444.
ii NALOII rROrE11TK•,INc ,
36
Y LarersTpl( Y, �b• ` / ar.N M .�• ar,:' �� 1
SIC
s4rrsoN t Ra•sao •' •' •.•
+Aror•rool > 0 •!.!o K me K •f •• -�;' /� .I: (-
u • ,/ _ : ! :,N • 111CTOMA
r� s '. 7I' c000RE •E`�Lr 1 . taE u
Y asA• 66Ac •r._ J
i•- � TA A TNNRIirs SIE i5
N at' u.la •: Roc IrI M :Y i • �''•• 251E 2
AND co
-a Aa
j 4NaTCI« LArrERTT 1� 4y lo.C�:/' /
•M ell e L -lTA110LOTo CO" O r[tt •KRRT A�,,,•• ML►N t�
sHs•at 1sr.Es.Ac rr.• uT.oy a' "�al,� wy}6• aN.•a aC: 1 r
sE M arlrN .•�N.•4 t �•/ �' •�lC..�•,;.j�;Ox M 1
t l l.Or AC uaNAN�iItt eo•N[4A E�T_oi
a wE 4 :3 1 =a/'' z1•.q 1c. 6467-oa -AcT7
aY - c«N66rINc ET At
• -44
N r ,..�'.'. `.,C.y,--- 't`" K :'• «olr1lN •1 MISS Ac CEO"**
rLlo[rANN f wn•rrArr[T act �S=llly y+
\ \ 3".so M 407.0s SIC TA., AC .y+
LL 10.90- 7
41.66 K
*AM 01
/Irlll ■1cu[r ~ �, •Nlry p, •EON"ET1%, T t
; a _%.�'• ,„. '�;- N1•TIE rAjlll rlLo[rArr s - J! - %r ,
j.
' f, r' • to ae SSW"
I
.�.-- "�.... �`'' /� .r • E7 K • 1K iNa 111;
r1mE rANN 1!!.66 K ,YICTORINL
i
Alt
Ac
*� ,�.
'p N:)).N M
J -
Jr-•-'_�.,.�... ,'�... .._.-. I srA•)EN I Y a fes) t OCTTtrcowrT
...�- , 217.31T K
j < 9
430.40 K
A.`�M r..b• "� •_.. I
SAN RAMON VALLEY FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
PROJECT NAME PEREIRA SUBDIVISION FP # 93045
ADDRESS 1501 FINLEY ROAD, PLEASANTON X-REF#
CONTACT: JOHN&DEBBIE PEREIRA PHONE: 248-1545
OCCUPANCY CLASS R-3 DESCRIPTION SINGLE FAMILY-DWELLING
CONSTRUCTION TYPE VN DESCRIPTION WOOD FRAME
CHECK ONE: ❑ NEW CONST ❑ TENANT IMP ❑ PLANNING APPLICATIONS
❑ ADDN ❑ AFES ❑ FIRE ALARM ® MINOR OTHER
SUBDIV
BLDG/PLAN AGENCY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY APN# 220-100-005
AGENCY# MS 98-00013
APPLICABLE CODES/ORDINANCES 1994 UFC, SRVFPD ORD. #15
ADD'L INFO: BLDG AREA FLR AREA 3 LOTS # OF FLRS
SPECIAL FEES WATER ACCESS PRIVATE
ACCESS GATES LOCK BOX OTHER
REVIEWED BY: MICHAEL MENTINK DATE January 21, 1999
FIRE DISTRICT COMMENTS:
1. Fire apparatus roadways shall extend to within 150 ft. (45.72 m) of any portion of an exterior wall of the
first story of any building. (UFC, 1994, Sec. 902.2.1(s4)
2. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, submit a full set of building plans to the San Ramon Valley Fire
Protection District for review and approval. (UBC/CBC 1994, Sec. 103.3.2.5)(P_13)
3. NOTE ON FIELD PLAN:
Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be
plainly visible and legible from the street or road fronting the property. Said numbers shall contrast with
their background. Individual suite numbers shall be permanently posted on the main entrance doors of
tenant spaces. (UFC, 1994, Sec. 901.4.4)(P_19)
4. If public water supply is not available to provide required fire flows, a separate engineered plan showing
how applicant is to provide fire flows shall be submitted to San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District for
approval prior to issuance of grading and building permits. The installation of an approved automatic fire
extinguishing sprinkler system may be required depending on use, square footage, etc., of any/all buildings,
and may be utilized as a mitigation to offset other deficiencies (if not otherwise required). (UFC 1994, Sec.
903.3.11) 903.3.1.1)(P_21)
5. Any/all gates across Fire District accessways shall have a minimum 12 foot (3.7 meters)clear, unobstructed
linear width and a clear vertical height of 13 feet 6 inches (4.1 meters). All locking devices shall provide
for Fire District emergency access. All gate plans shall be approved by San Ramon Valley Fire Protection
District prior to construction. (UFC 1994, Sec. 902.2.2.7)0-2-7)
6. Upon completion of work and prior to occupancy, contact your area inspector of the San Ramon Valley
Fire Protection District at 838-6680 to schedule a final inspection.
48 HOURS NOTICE IS REQUIRED FOR ALL INSPECTIONS(c9I)
4
7. Plans are acceptable contingent upon compliance with the above-listed comments.(c-92)
8. Nothing in this review is intended to authorize or approve of any aspects of the design or installation which
do not strictly comply with all applicable codes and standards. San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District
is not responsible for inadvertent errors or omissions pertaining to this review and/or subsequent field
inspection(s) i.e., additional comments may be added during subsequent drawing review or field inspection.
Please call if there are any questions.(c-98)
Nfichael Mentink, Fire Inspector
San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District
838-6686
Plan Review Fee: $40.00
DARWIN MYERS ASSOCIATES
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH ■ ENGINEERING GEOLOGY
8 February 1999
Mr. Bob Drake, Principal Planner
Community Development Department
County Administration Building -
651 Pine Street, 2nd Floor N. Wing
Martinez,CA 94553
Subject: Geologic Review Services Contract
MS 980013 /Pereira Property
Finley Road,Tassajara Valley Area
Contra Costa County
DMA Project# 3015.99
Dear Bob:
At your request we have reviewed the geotechnical report submitted by the applicant for the
captioned project. The report was prepared by Engeo Inc. and is titled as follows:
Geotechnical Reconnaissance
Pereira Property, MS98-0013
Finley Road
Contra Costa County, California
Engeo Job# 3718.2.050.01
(report dated November 2, 1998)
Introduction
1. Background
Engeo performed a geologic/geotechnical investigation of the Tassajara Valley Project(1991;
Engeo Job#NI-3283-WI), that included photointerpretation, literature review, subsurface
exploration and preparation of an original geologic and landslide map of this study area. The
MS980013 project area is a portion of the previously proposed Tassajara project. Therefore, the
Engeo report that is subject to this review represents a second assessment of the Pereira property,
this time focusing on the proposed three-lot minor subdivision.
2. Existing Conditions
There are two existing residences and assorted barns, trailers and corrals adjacent to the
Tassajara Creek channel (on proposed Parcels B and C). Moreover, there is a newly constructed
road that crosses the creek and extends westerly,climbing to a building site in the northwest
portion of Parcel A.
1308 PINE STREET ■ MARTINEZ, CA 94553 0 925/370-9330
Page 2
Engeo Report
Based on photo interpretation and a site visit by an engineering geologist, Engeo has prepared a
map showing the distribution of landslide deposits and colluvium on the parcel(Engeo Figure 1).
The focus of the Engeo report is a potential building site on proposed Parcel C that is located on
the crest of a secondary ridge that trends E-NE and an adjacent swale area. The building site is
accessed by the road that provides access to the residence on Parcel A. According to Engeo the
proposed building site is underlain by bedrock at a shallow depth. Tile building site is not
susceptible to liquefaction. The geotechnical concerns is a dormant landslide of approximately 2
acres on a east-facing hillside that overlooks the Tassajara Creek channel. The head scarp area
of this slide extends to a point near the crest of the secondary ridge. Consequently,the slide has
some significance to the approach to development of the building site. Engeo's specific
comments are as follows:
• No fill should be placed on the landslide.
• No structure should be placed within the landslide without prior detailed geotechnical
study
• Prior to construction of the residence, several test pits or borings are recommended
within the building site on Parcel C to provide the basis for foundation design.
DMA Findings
In our opinion the Engeo report is adequate for the processing of the minor subdivision. The
conditions of approval should require a deed disclosure statement for Parcel C referencing the
Engeo report. An Advisory Note should indicate that a geotechnical report will be required prior
to issuance of a building permit for the hillside residence on Parcel C.
We trust this letter provides the evaluation and comments that you requested. Please call if you
have any questions.
Sincerely,
DARWIN MYERS ASSOCIATES
Darwin Myers, CEG 6
Principal
cc: Ron Killough, Building Inspection Department
Paul Guerin, Engeo Inc.
Bob Duchi, dk Associates
3015LTR.WPD
DARWIN MYERS ASSOCIATES
Community Contra Harvey E. BDirector of Community Develapmc
Developm � A ;0!'_'".T" ����1�� Costa
Departmen __�ii�}��rr __
County Administrat Bcttk 243 AM to: c COUntY
651 Pine Street
4th Floor, North' lnit� � '
Martinez, California 94553-0095 ' '' •.% ,`
0 .ts •••
(510) 335-1210 •r
Phone:
0. = Date:
)q COU�'C"t
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
Building Inspection Please submit your comments as follows:
t,-SSD,Environmental Health '7f2./�y'$
HSD,Hazardous Materials Project Planner: f6lp
P/W-Flood Control(Full Size)
,t,-'F'/W-Engineering Svcs{Full Siz } 4419 `'�'�'�
Date Forwarded County File Number:
P/W-Traffic(Reduced)
P/W-Special Districts(Reduced) Prior to:
Comprehensive Planning
Redevelopment Agency
Historical Resources Information System
Fish&Game,Region We have found the following special programs
Fire District apply to this application:
Sanitary District
Water District AID Redevelopment Area
School District
Nearby City Active Fault Zone
Sheriff's Office-Adm.&Comm. Svcs.
Alamo Improvement Association
El Sobrante Pig. &Zoning Committee �Ood Hazard Area, Panel # QSt�Z7
MAC
Gen.Svcs. -Dep. Director,Communications /)a 60 dBA Noise Control
Co unity Organizations
Within 2,000 ft of Hazardous Waste Site
Traffic Zone 4-b
Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by taw or ordinance.
Please send copies of your response to the Applicant and Owner.
No comments on this application
Our Comments are attached
Comments:
Slgnatu
Agency
K 7 �
Date
rA lchells\convnentLreq-2/13/96-nta + '`
R EGIONAL PARKS
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
Jan Sin
October 7, 1998 Peede
snt
Bob Drake Beverly Lane
Vice-President
Contra Costa Count Carol Severin
County Treasurer
Community Development Department John Sutter
Secretary
County Administration Building Jocelyn Combs
Ted Radke
651 Pine Street, 4 North Doug Siden
Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Pat O'Brien
General Manager
RE: John and Debbie Pereira, Tentative Parcel Map (095980013)
Dear Bob:
Thank you for referring the subject map to the East Bay Regional Park District. Over the past
several years the District has indicated its interest in the Pereira property as a potential link in the
Sycamore Valley-to-Mt. Diablo Regional Trail, as referenced in the District's Master Plan.
In a December 1993 appeal hearing on Pereira Land Use Permit CF 2013-93, the San Ramon
Valley Regional Planning Commission proposed a condition requiring the Pereiras to dedicate to
the District a floating trail easement within the 200-foot setback of Tassajara Creek. Mr. Pereira
agreed to this dedication and an agreement was drawn up and revised subsequent to negotiations
with the Pereiras. A final form, acceptable to both parties, was drawn in June 1996, but was
never signed.
The District requests that, as a condition of approval of the subject parcel map, a 25 ft. public
trail easement in favor of the East Bay Regional Park District be shown on the map and recorded
against the deeds to Parcels B and C.
Please notify i:s ^f fi:, public actions on this appl:cat:c.. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Brian Wiese
Advance Planning
cc: John Pereira
�S 2950 Peralta Oaks Court P.O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 Tel:(510)635-0135 TDD:(510)633-0460 Fax:(510)569-4319
REGIONAL PAR. KS
98 fly ..4 Fin 4: S
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT
4CAj�``Fll�D P) IRECTORS
November 3, 1998
Jean Siri
President
Beverly Lane
Vice-President
Bob Drake Carol Severin
Treasurer
Contra Costa County Community Development Dept. John Sutter
651 Pine Street, 4th Floor,North Wing Secretary
Jocelyn Combs
Martinez, CA 94553 Ted Radke
Doug Siden
Pat O'Brien
General Manager
Re: John and Debbie Pereira, Tentative Parcel Map(095980013)
(Sycamore Valley to Mt. Diablo Trail)
Dear Bob:
I have had the opportunity to meet with John Pereira(October 28, 1998) and ground check a
potential alignment for a trail easement on his property as proposed as a condition of approval by
the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission. This trail segment will someday be a link
in the Sycamore Valley to Mt. Diablo Regional Trail. The alignment will generally follow a
setback from the creek and will utilize some existing service road and will require new
construction in other locations.
The alignment we reviewed is acceptable to both the Park District and Mr. Pereira and can be
staked out and described prior to recordation of a tentative map. Actual construction of the trail
segment will not be necessary at this time as other future segments still need to be resolved.
I wanted to contact you so that you would be aware that Mr. Pereira and the Park District had
resolved this issue in order that you may proceed with processing Mr. Pereira's application.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Steve Fiala
Trails Specialist
cc: John Pereira
�� 2950 Peralta Oaks Court P.O. Box 5381 Oakland, CA 94605-0381 Tel:(510)635-0135 TDD. (510)633-0460 Fax.(510)569-4319
APR-26-1999 MON 0315 PM FAX NO. F. UZ/U�
REGIONAL RK
PA S
............................................
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DISTRICT P�qw
80AU OF 01HECTORS
flcvcrly Lane
April 26, 1999 prorslgcnIas
va
Carol SOV01,11
Vico-i'rc:nttuni
Bob Drake War,,;,
Contra Costa County Community Development Dept. Jon suucr
651 Pine Street, 4th Floor, North Wing
Martinez.,CA 94553 A crfetNiy
esk��rnp
Ac
ft I5
Ted Hadke
Re: John and Debbie Pereira,Vesting Tentative parcel Map MS 98-00013 w:un Y
(Sycamore Valley to Mt. Diablo Trail) War 4J'""'
Je:7n Slrl
Wall 1
Dear Bob:
I have had the opportunity to review the Vesting Tentative Map for the Pereira property Gan`°;BM;e"na�,
which designates a trail easement on his property as proposed as a condition of approval
by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission. This trail segment will someday
be a link in the Sycamore Valley to Mt. Diablo Regional Trail. The alignment will
generally follow a setback from the creek and will utilize some existing service road and
wilt require new construction in other locations.
The alignment is acceptable to both the Park District and Mr. Pereira and minor field
adjustments can be worked out during construction. Actual construction of the trail
segment will not be necessary at this time as other future segments on other properties still
need to be resolved. I will continue to coordinate with Mr. Periera on future development
of the trail and he and I have discussed construction and maintenance issues and are in
agreement on how to proceed at such time that the District is ready to implement the trail.
I wanted to provide you this letter so that you would be aware that Mr.Pereira and the
Park District had completed a review process for the subdivision application to the
satisfaction of both parties.
Please feel free to contact me should you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Steve Fiala
Trails Specialist
cc: John Pereira
2950 Pcratta Oaks Court P.O. Box 53a1 Oakland,CA 94606-0381
www.ebparks.orq TEL: 510 635.0135
Too 510 633-0460 13 FAK, 5 10 569-43 19
ragdon
commudtYiP i _JA COM-TY Contra D ECM it munity Developme
DevelopP -ra' PH 2: 13 Costa
Departm A t-_ !) AUG 10
County AdrniriJ$-"4" : U.�4!. County 1998
Tqqi!d R T.
651 Pine Street $E: I
4th Floor, North Wing U--v S. ASSISTANT-SUPERINTE
NDENT
Martinez, California 94553-0095
S.R.V.U.
SIR
Phone: (510) 335-1210
Date.
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
We request your comments regarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
wilding Inspection Please submit your comments as follows:
_vSSD,Environmental Health 71P-I? T
HSD,Hazardous Materials Project Planner. sc)
KP/W-Flood Control(Full Size) 4V8 -30&V,
Date Forwarded W
t,,-VW-Engineering Svcs(Full4 --Com/
County File Number: A415 ?9 /;�
XP/W-Traffic(Reduced) " Prior to:
P/W-Special Districts(Reduced)
...Comprehensive Planning
—Redevelopment Agency
V Historical Resources Information System
X7 Fish&Game,Region We We have found the following special programs
Fire District a apply to this application:
Y, Sanitary District .1
Water District
Redevelopment Area
School District
Nearby City AY)Active Fault Zone
Sheriff's office Adm.&Comm. Svcs.
Alamo Improvement Association
El Sobrante Plg. &Zoning CommitteeW-kood Hazard Area, Panel
MAC
Gen. Svcs.-Dep. Director,Communications 60 dBA Noise Control
Counity Organizations
Within 2,000 ft of Hazardous Waste Site
M t.
jo
'd
Traffic Zone —A
Q
u-
E"
Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by law or ordinance
Pt se send copies of your response to the Applicant and Owner.
S'
rNo comments on this application
Our Comments are attached
Comments:
"iggn U�re _
e<")W UV6
Agency
Date
Harvey E. Bragdon
Community Contra Director of Community Development
Development Uj.rN� J? r; , . Costa De artment `' �' o
County Administration Building County
651 Pine Street s E L
4th Floor, North Wing
Martinez, California 94553-0095
514 335-1210
Phone: o �=
Date:
S)a COt1��
AGENCY-COMMENT REQUEST
We request your comments r,egarding the attached application currently under review.
DISTRIBUTION
?`<C' uilding Inspection Please submit your comments as follows:
Environmental Health X12.1`?S
HSD,Hazardous Materials Project Planner:t <, .1 i _ a `-�—
KP/W-Flood Control(Full Size)
-Engineering Svcs{Full Si } �� �"30
Date Forwarded u County File Number: Com
- /
X P/W-Traffic(Reduced) �}
P/W-Special Districts(Reduced) Prior to:- 'K
Comprehensive Planning
Redevelopment Agency
Historical Resources Information System
Fish&Game,Region We have found the following special programs
Fire District apply to this application:
Y Sanitary District
Water District Redevelopment Area
School DistrictU a
:�[Nearby City
_sEzt::�Sheriff's Office-Adm.&Comm. Svcs. Active Fault Zone
Alamo Improvement Association
El Sobrante
Plg. &ZoningCommittee kod Hazard Area, Panel # (
MAC
Gen. Svcs.-Dep. Director,Communications /J+�60 dBA Noise Control
Co unity Organizations
�.,.
Within 2,,000 ft of Hazardous Waste Site
fa — CIO All
Traffic Zone '
Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by law or ordinance.
Plea send copies of your response to the Applicant and Owner.
No comments on this application
Our Comments are attached
Comments: {, « r { - k
Signature
Agen
IA /cilk
Date
al..lshellslcommeM.req-2/13/96-ntz
Chapter 84-38
GENERAL AGRICULTURAL
DISTRICT
Article 84-38.2 General
Sections:
84-38`:202 General provisions.
Article 84-38.4 Uses
Sections:
84-38.402 Uses—Permitted.
8438.404 Uses—Requiring land use
permit.
84-38.406 Uses—Refuse disposal site—
Permit required.
Article 84-38.6 Lots
Sections:
84-38.608 Lot area,width and depth.
84-38.610 Existing legal lots excepted.
Article 84-38.8 Building Height
Sections:
84-38.802 Building height—Maximum.
Article 84-38.10 Yards
Sections:
84-38.1002 Yard—Side.
84-38.1004 Yard—Setback.
8438.1006 Yard—Rear.
Article 84-38.12 Land Use and Variance
Permits
Sections:
84-38.11-02 Land use and variance permit
—Granting.
Article 84-38.2
General
84-38.202 General provisions. All of the
land lying within an A-2 general agricultural
district may be used for any of the following
uses, under the following regulations set forth in
this chapter. (Ord. 1569: Ord. 1555: prior code
8156 (part): Ord. 1406).
Article 84-38.4
Uses
84-38.402 Uses — permitted. Uses
permitted in the A-2 district shall be as follows:
340
GENERAL AGRICULTURAL "T 84-38.404-84-38.1002
(I) All types of agriculture, including general (9) Commercial recreational facilities when
farming, horticulture, floriculture, nurseries and the principal use is not in a building;
greenho.uses, . mushroom rooms, dairying, (10) Boat storage areas within one mile by
livestock production, fur farms, poultry raising, public road of a boat launching facility open to
animal breeding, aviaries, apiaries, forestry, and the public;
similar agricultural uses; (11) Retail Firewood sales;
(2) Other agricultural uses, including the (12) Recycling operations intended to sort
erection and maintenance of sheds, warehouses, and/or process material for reuse except for
granaries, dehydration plants, hullers, fruit and those activities described in Section 88-4.206;
vegetable packing plants, and buildings for the (13) Museums in which objects of historical.
storage of agricultural products and equipment; artistic, scientific or cultural importance are
(3) A stand not exceeding two hundred preserved and displayed. (Ords. 89-46 § 21,
square feet for sale of agricultural products 76-36 § 3, 7437 § 2, 60-82, 1988, 1569 § 2:
grown on the premises. The stand shall be set prior code § 8156(b)-, Ords. 1406 § 3, 497 § 4,
back at least twenty-five feet from the front 382 § 4E).
property line;
(4) A detached single family dwelling on each 84-38.406 Uses — Refuse disposal site --
parcel
parcel and the accessory structures and uses Permit required. Refuse disposal sites are
normally auxiliary to it; permitted in the A-2 district upon the issuance
(5) Foster home or family care home of a permit under the provisions of Chapter
operated by a public agency, or by a private 418-4.(Ord. 72-89 § 2, 1972).
agency which has obtained state or local
approval (license) for the proposed--operation, Article 84-38.6
where not more than six minors reside on the Lots
premises with not more than two supervisory
persons. 84-38.608 Lot area, width and depth.
(6) A family day care home where care, Except as provided in Section 84-38.610, uses
protection and supervision of twelve or fewer allowable under Article 84-38.4 are allowed only
children in the provider's own home are provid- on lots which equal or exceed all of the
ed for periods of less than twenty-four hours following: five acres in area, two hundred fifty
per day, while the parents or guardians are feet average width,and two hundred foot depth.
away. (Ords. 86-43 § 13, 68-25 § 2, 1968, 1569, (Ord. 73-86 § I (part), 1973).
1555, 1535: prior code § 8156(a): Ord. 1406).
- 84-38.610 Existing legal lots excepted. Any
84-38.404 Uses—Requiring land use permit. single lot legally created in an A-2 district before
The following uses are allowable on the issuance November 29, 1973, at least forty thousand
of a land use permit: square feet in area may be used as provided in
(1) Allowable uses designated in Section Article 84-38-4. (Ord. 73-86 § I (part), 1973).
84-36.404:
(2) Merchandising of agricultural supplies Article 84-38.8
and services incidental to an agricultural use: Building Height
(3) Canneries, wineries and processing of
agricultural products; 84-38.802 Building height ..— Maximum.
(4) Cold storage plants'. Building height provisions for the A-2 district
(5) Slaughterhouses and stockyards: shall be the same as those for the A-I district
(6) Rendering plants and fertilizer palnts or (Section 84-36.802). (Ord. 1569: Ord. 1555:
yards; prior code § 8156(0: Ord. 1406).
(7) Livestock auction or sales yards:
(8) Living accommodations for agricultural Article 84-38.10
workers to be primarily used for temporary Yards
housing of agricultural workers while performing
seasonal agricultural work on the owner's 84-38.1002 Yard — Side. There shall be an
property, aggregate side yard width of at least forty feet.
341 (Contra Colita County 12-89)
84-38.1004-84-40.404 ('WING
No side yards shall be less than twenty feet in
width. No barns, stables,, apiaries, aviaries, or 1:
other buildings or structures used to house
livestock, grain-fed rodents, bees, birds, or
poultry shall be located in the A-2 district nearer
than fifty feet to the boundary line of any
residential land use district. (Ord. 1569: Ord.
1555: prior code § 8156(g): Ord. 1406).
84-38.1004 —Yard — Setback. Setback (front
yard) provisions for the A-2 district shall be the
same as those for the A-I district (84-36.1004).
(Ord. 1569: Ord. 1555: prior code § 8156(h):
Ord. 1406).
84-38.1006 Yard — Rear. There shall be a
rear yard of at least fifteen feet for any
structure. (Ord. 1569: Ord. 1555: prior code
8156(1): Ord. 1406).
Article 84-38.12
Land Use and Variance Permits
84-38.1202 Land use and variance permit —
.Granting. Land use permits for the special uses:
enumerated in Section 84-38.404 and variance
permits to modify the provisions contained in
Sections 84-38.602 through 84-38.1006 may be
granted in accordance with Chapter 82-6. (Ord.
1569: Ord. 1555: prior code § 8156(j): Ord.
1406).
01-24-1994 12:32PM FROP TIGHTER IMAGES TO 2481546 P.01
Vic y zs
Save Mount Diablo
P.O. Box 5378
Walnut Creek, CA 9459.6
Fax number: (510) 229-4275
January 24, 1994
Mr. John Pereira
1501 Finley Road
Pleasanton, CA 94588
Fax number 248-1546
Dear Mr. Pereira,
In line with our telephone conversations this past week I am
Pleased to inform you that the members of the Board of
Directors of Save Diablo agree to withdraw our appeal to - the
Board of Supervisors on your application for a second house
plus other construction at your property on Finley Road.
Our appeal was based upon our concerns as follows: There
was no easement included by the Zoning Administrator for a
potential trail corridor through the lower part of your
property, and we were unsure that the San Ramon Valley
Planning Commission's requirement for an easement would be
fulfilled; there was concern on our part for further
development on your property in the short term future; and
there is the continuing concern on our part on further
fragmentation of the Finley Road area prior to - the
completion of the Tassajara Road Specific Plan, which, as
you know, is just beginning its assessment of the area.
Since the appeal was filed , we understand that you have been
in negotiations with the East Bay Regional Park District for
the purpose of establishing a trail easement, and we also
understand that an agreement has been reached. This action
removes one of our major concerns.
In our telephone conversation Saturday evening, January 22,
you indicated that you would be willing to instruct us by
letter that when and if you contemplate a subdivision of
your property (which is not occurring in this present
application) , you would be willing to meet with Save Mount
Diablo in order to address our mutual concerns as they exist
at that time before proceeding with subdivision application.
----------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------
0'1-24-1994 12:32PM Fr-g1 11IGHTER IMAGES Tn 2481546 P.02
We believe that the addressing of concerns at that time
would be satisfactory to -our interests in the protection of
this area, and, therefore, the reasons for our appeal are no
longer pertinent.
As to the third and broader reason - that is, the potential
for• further development of the general area prior to the
completion of the Tassajara Road Specific Plan - we can
address the issue without regard to your property.
We propose that our representative appear before the County
Board of Supervisors at the appointed date of the appeal,
January 25, 1994 , in order to state our withdrawal of the
appeal of your application, as a satisfactory agreement with
you has been reached, and he will address the board briefly
on our concern of premature development within the larger
area.
I hope that this letter has taken in account our mutual
concerns and is satisfactory to you.
Sincerely,
Susan Watson, President
Save Mount Diablo
,
H.7
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA! '-. ;". 'j C: 19
Adopted this Order on January 25 , 1994 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Smith, Bishop, McPeak , Torlakson and Powers
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Appeal By Save Mt. Diablo Of The San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission's Decision To Uphold The
Zoning Administrator's Approval Of County File #2013-
93, John And Debbie Pereira, San Ramon Area.
On January 18, 1994, the Board of Supervisors continued to
this date the hearing on the appeal by Save Mt. Diablo of the San
Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision to uphold
the Zoning Administrator's approval of County File #2013-93, John
and Debbie Pereira, applicants and owners, in the San Ramon area.
Seth Adams, representing Save Mt. Diablo, commented on the
letter dated January 24, 1994 withdrawing the appeal.
Supervisor Bishop commented on maintaining the integrity of
the trail along the creek.
Supervisor Torlakson moved to accept the withdrawal of the
appeal and requested that the staff notify Save Mt. Diablo of
any planning issues being considered near any parks and requested
that staff look at the trails issue relative to implementing the
trail system.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the withdrawal of the appeal
by Save Mt. Diablo relative to County File #2013-93 is ACCEPTED;
and Community Development Department staff is REQUESTED to notify
Save Mt. Diablo of any planning issues being considered near any
parks and look at the trails issue relative to implementing the
trail system.
Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board
CC: Community Development Department
County Counsel
John and Debbie Pereira
Save Mt. Diablo
I hereby certity that this Is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Su rvisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED:
PHIL TCHELO ,Clerk of the Board
Supe and u dministrator
. o
By ,Deouty
P. 01
Pereira Manch
.John & Debbie Pereira
1,505 Finley Road
Pleasanton, C,A, 94588
April 27, 1999
San Ramon Regional
Planning Commission
699 Old Orchard Drive
Danville, CA 94526
Dear Members of the board:
Oji Wednesday, May 5, 1999 you will be considering our application for a Rezoning and
Minor Subdivision. We ower a 19.3 acre parcel in the Tassajara Valley on Finley Road. We
are a 5 generation cattle operation whom our great-grandparents ranched for us back in
1893. We are not developers, but have been apart of our community for over 100 years.
Pereira Ranch does the Interpretive Prograun for Mt. Diablo State Park, also we run a
cattle and horse operation. We hope you will find our Tentative Map favorable,
Sincerely yours, _ --
ohn & Debbie Pereira
05V05/1999 12:39 5109473603 SAvt M1 ViAbL-U rHlaG vi
--IT
AWN
767 Date 5 S pa F
Post-
Z
4 W Fax Note
'
...
70 '3 From r n A-6
coJDOP(.hone 14 C0' Ot
Phone« S3 5
M Fax
33 S -
�� Fax« j' P p
,A,ttm: Bob Drake
SMD Hea marters San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
I I%Boulevard Way Contra Costa County Community Development
Suite 10 651 Pine Street-North Wing, Second Floor
Walnut Creek,CA 94695 Martinez, CA 94553
SMD MoWnt Address
P.O.Box 5376 May 5, 1999
Walnut Creek.CA 94596
Telephone Re: County File #RZ983062, #MS980013 (DK Associates/Pereira Application)
(925)947-3535
Fax
(925)947-3603 Commissioners:
email
savemtdiab@aol.com My apologies for not appearing at the public hearing on the Pereira subdivision
President and rezoning. I have a conflicting meeting this evening.
Malcolm Sproul
Vice President,Founder In 1993 Save Mount Diablo appealed the decisions of the Zoning Administrator
An Bonwcll Pp
Secretary and of this Commission, approving two additional residential units for a family
Amara Koss.J.D. member and agricultural worker on the Pereira parcel on Finley Rd., because we
Treasurer felt they would lead to and include the impacts of a subdivision without the
Nigel Ogilvie
analysis or mitigation a subdivision application might require. We requested a
Executive Board scenic easement over the parcel, except for building envelopes around the new
Robert Adams.J.D.
Mary L.Bowerman.PhD. residences, ana md trail easement in favor of the East Bay Regional Park District.
Fo nderr The latter condition was granted, although it was not subsequently recorded.
Paul Choisser
Don de Frenwy,PhD.
Karen Hunt Given the subdivision and rezoning application before the commission, Save
Stephen Joseph Mount Diablo continues to feel that a scenic easement is the best mitigation for
Bob Marx, development on the Pereira parcel. We've worked with John Pereira and his
Stcvcn Mchlman,J.D. P
Bob Nunn engineer, Bob Duchi of DK Associates. Our concerns regarding any additional
Allan Prager development can be resolved if a scenic easement is placed on the entire parcel,
Dave Sargent except for building envelopes around the three residential sites, and if an agreed
Executive Director upon grail easement and align merit is recorded. These measures would preclude
Gerry Keenan further subdivision and will guarantee future public access along the Park
District's Sycamore Valley to Mount Diablo regional trail.
We're grateful that the Pereiras have agreed to these conditions, which will help
maintain Finley Road's rural character, and have instructed DK Associates to
provide the commission with a map delineating the scenic easement, the three
building envelopes and the trail alignment negotiated with the East Bay Regional
Park District. If the Commission adopts these conditions, Save Mount Diablo has
no objection to the rezoning or subdivision of the Pereira parcel into three lots.
UW Ub/I VJy 12 Z)OLAvr- IVI I W.LHDL-U
One caveat is that the draft scenic easement language the Commission has been
considering-spX&ests that dedicated developMent ri hts are more limited in nature
than has been customary in the l2ast;_st4tinjz for exec le that "developMent fights
to be conveyed to the Coun!K shall include the right to nprove or disc rove of an
of the following.activities..." mEMIX restates the CoW&ts EEplatory authori!y. The
dear intent of develo anent restrictions in Many cases is to preclude M_further
subdivision or development.
The a licant has agreed to the followin&-.-.Scenic easement language in this case
should cItIrly state that further subdivision is precluded. In addition, althoyzh a
cell site exists at the southwest coMer of this site, that site should be included within
the easement area, with the special exception_that telecommunications uses are
allowed Lsuhlect to the County's normal zopft conditions), but that other
development is not. We have no objection in this, case tote exceptions regyested
by the app
-jicant forRossible leach fields and well sites, and for Rroposed roa
shown on the tentative-map.
Thank you for your consideration of these requests. Please notify us of future
hearing dates, and the adoption of conditions related to this application.
Sincerely,
ovl—z,
Seth Adams
Director of Land Programs
cc-. Bob Duchi, DK Associates, FAX 932-0910
Community em M.Bar ;AIC
Contra f om ty D opm t i e
Development CostaiDepartment
�
County Administration BuildingCoun 1 4 "
g GE__� t
651 Pine Street ��`�"f: °� ':
4th Floor, North Wing `- S.L.WEIR,COUNTY CLERK
Martinez, California 94553-0095
= l CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY
By 7 —DEPUTY t
Pho025) 335-1214 �. ,,__�' r� ,,oma April 14, 1999
ST'4 COU11'�
NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
County File #RZ983062 &
County File #MS980013
Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the "Guidelines for Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended to date, this is to advise you
that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial
study on the following project:
The project consists of two related applications described as follows:
DK ASSOCIATES (Applicant), JOHN & DEBBIE PEREIRA(Owners)
A. County File#RZ983062 - A request to rezone approximately 19.3 acres from
Exclusive Agricultural, A-20, district to General Agricultural, A-2, district.
B. County File#MS980013 - A request for vesting tentative map approval to
subdivide 19.3 acres into three parcels.
The subject site is located at #1505 Finley Road in the Tassajara area. (CT 3551.03) (ZA-
U-20) (APN 220-100-005)
The proposed development will not result in any significant impacts.
A copy of the negative declaration and all documents referenced in the negative declaration may
be reviewed in the offices of the Community Development Department, and Application and
Permit Center at the McBrien Administration Building, North Wing, Second Floor, 651 Pine
Street, Martinez, during normal business hours.
Public Comment Period - The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the
environmental documents begins on April 14, 1999 and extends to 5:00 P.M., Tuesday, May 4,
1999. Any comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address-
Office Hours Monday- Friday:8:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd&5th Fridays of each month
N
Bob Drake
Community Development Department
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street, North Wing, 4th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
It is anticipated that the proposed Negative Declaration will be considered for adoption at a
meeting of the Contra Costa County San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission on
Wednesday, May 5, 1999. The hearing is anticipated to be held at the Board Room of the San
Ramon Valley Unified School District, 699 Old Orchard Lane, Danville. It is expected that
the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission will also conduct a hearing on the
application at that same meeting.
Bob Drake
Principal Planner
Att. Vicinity Map (USGS)
cc: County Clerk's Office (2 copies)
cAms980013.noi
RD\
-Z-
/lay 4, 1999
Mr. Bob Drake 99 M Y -4 PM 3= 40
Community Development Department
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street, 4th Floor Annex
Martinez, CA 94553
Re: Scenic Easement
Rezoning and Minor Subdivision
Pereira Property
County File#RZ983062 and #MS980013
Dear Bob:
We are writing to respectfully request that you amend your staff report to
recommend the alternative action for the use of a Scenic Easement as shown on
page S-11 of your.staff report and in accordance with the attached map for the
proposed Scenic Easement.
Our conversations with Mr. Seth Adams of Save Mt. Diablo have produced the
alternative of designating a Scenic Easement as the preferred method of
guaranteeing preservation of the scenic hillsides and slopes while also
protecting the desired building envelopes around the existing and proposed
improvements as shown on the attached map.
We also wish to clarify our understanding that the installation and maintenance
of existing and proposed roadways and driveways, and installation or
maintenance of existing and proposed wells and septic systems are exempt from
the restrictions of the Scenic Easement.
Please make the necessary modifications to your staff report to allow the
changes mentioned above. By this letter we are requesting that, given the
changes and the conditions are mutually satisfactory, we wish to be placed on
the Consent Ccalendcar.
Sincerely,
John Pereira
enclosures
cc: Seth Adams, Save Mt. Diablo w/erclosure
Zn
N
w Tis
li
W AA
VI
00,11,
ir
S
-
--�\ Yy, � �•�. � �-. _-- �r�—;�'' ._. _` � � � to�
2
o Q
Vii._" 3�'-- - *p P ,
\ 'l uc l ° rn
1f�� 11
��,\1\ 1 %� �/'6� ' ���• �� /�1 �,._��cdw°f a 1n,'�``__ ;tea; t _- / Zj
BUIUN PAREgf _ 8
:14.�Js.T5SA" M03 11T,
442
54 (17 71
«ii4a»tr('e°r"4 Mrs�eootr Nt9$
17a= '7 ..x541
ti ._M �, `�T ; �FtN1.EL Y a ROAD° �— �,�,\ '�
' �, n, ,
O O ` '1
t O O N
�i
cl
40
�M♦ +�c�1
L G b 1C 2 D Otp'+ A�P` OScO Q1 r'N tl�Yb
�o •°�
3S6QA., rv� O z ^+ Q r 3 +�ONc M -Ask
s . gp OyOp <
n
L A
t'