HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01311984 - T.3 3
r
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
'Adopted this Order on January 31, -19,84 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers , Fanden , Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
SUBJECT: Hearing on the recommendation of the County Planning
Commission on amendment to the Pleasant Hill BARTD
Station Specific Plan.
This being the time fixed for hearing on the recommen-
dation of the County Planning Commission on an amendment to the
Pleasant Hill BARTD Station Specific Plan; and
Harvey Bragdon, Assistant Director of Planning, having
advised that the County Planning Commission has recommended that
the Pleasant Hill BARTD Station Specific Plan adopted by the Board
on June 7 , 1983 , be amended and having also advised that . the County
Planning Commission has recommended that the Board adopt the changes
as shown in its Resolution Number 9-1.984 , Exhibit A attached
hereto and by reference incorporated herein; and
Supervisor Torlakson having requested clarification
of the action which was being proposed.; and
Harvey Bragdon, having advised that Resolution Number
9-1984 , of the County Planning Commission, deals. with the realign-
ment of Oak Road and adjustment to all of the areas affected
by the realignment listed on page two of the specific amendments
which the Commission is asking the Board to adopt ; and
The Chairman having opened the public hearing, and the
following persons having appeared :
Ed Dimmick, 100 Brockhurst Court, Walnut Creek., .wh.o
recommended that the Board adopt the proposed roadway alignment , but
not adopt the full 100-foot wide roadway; and
W. Cressm an, 140 Brockhurst Road , Walnut Creek, who
urged continued communication with the homeowners affected , as
he and several other neighbors would be severely impacted by
this proposal; and
Wilber Duberstein, P . 0 . Box 574, San Ramon, representing
Walnut Creek Associates , having stated that his client .would
like to go on record as being in favor.. of the Assessment District
and the modifications , but expressed concern with respect to
the widening of Wayne Drive which would take 40 feet off of a
section of the Walnut Creek Associates property, and would eliminate
20 percent of the parking , and also having expressed concern regard-
ing access rights to Buskirk, and having recommened that some type
of compromise for access and parking be worked out ; and
Mr. Duberstein having further stated that he wished to
go on record that there are legal problems and contract involve-
ments with property not involved in the Assessment District; and
-1- /
Supervisor Torlakson having inquired as to whether
,. or not this issue had been addressed at the Planning Commission 's
% hearing; and
Wilber Duberstein, having commented that this issue
was not discussed at the Planning Commission 's hearing as they were
not , at that time, known to him; and
The Chairman having closed the public hearing; and
Supervisor Torlakson having commented that he would
like to-.have staff advise on the Wayne Drive issue and the
Oak Road alignment , and the roll that the County Assessment District
will have if such an action is to follow; and
Harvey Bragdon, having addressed the concerns expressed
by the speakers , and having stated that the Planning staff was
working on a number of options with Mr. Duberstein and his
clients; and
Supervisor Torlakson having inquired as to whether or
not adopting the recommendation before the Board at this time,
would lock the County into a particular pattern; and
Harvey Bragdon, having advised that the staff was not
at his time prepared to recommend anything other than adoption
of the amendments to the plan as recommended by the Planning
Commission, and stated that as work with Mr. Duberstein and. his
client 's progresses he felt that some alternatives to the problems
would be reached; and
Supervisor McPeak having expressed concern with respect
to the people who have lived in this area for many years and
also inquired as to the financial stability of the homeowners
in that area, and having expressed concerns as to what the specific
recommendation before the Board was at this time; and
Harvey Bragdon, having advised and summarized that the
Planning Commission 's recommendations to the Board were basically:
1 . Oak Road be as shown on amended figure 5 •
2 . The open space land use designation between subareas
7 and 8 be eliminated .
3 . The utility open space corridors be amended to
clarify its intended use .
Harvey Bragdon having advised that another hearing
to refine transferability and other items would be held before
the Board of Supervisors at a later date; and
Supervisor McPeak having moved approval of the
recommendations as listed on the report from the Planning
Commission, pages 1 and 2 under the heading of Oak Road alignment ,
1 through 8, Exhibit A attached hereto. and by reference incorpora-
ted herein; and
Supervisor Torlakson having requested staff to continue
working with the residents in the Wayne Drive area;
The Board members having discussed the matter, IT IS
ORDERED that the recommendation of Supervisor McPeak is
APPROVED as recommended.
Harvey Bragdon, having recommended that the Board
declare its intent to adopt a specific plan development fee,
and the Planning Commission be requested to establish the same
fee for those who are not participants in the Assessment District .
On motion of Supervisor McPeak, seconded by Supervisor
Schroder, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the above recommendation
of Harvey Bragdon is APPROVED.
/hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of .
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervis on the date shown.
ATTESTS
J.R. OLSSON, COUNTY CLERK
.and ex officio Clerk of the Board
Ori Dept :: Clerk of the Board B1'
g p . Deputy
cc : Director of Planning
Public Works Director
County Administrator
County Counsel
RESOLUTION NO. 9-1984
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA
COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDA-
TIONS ON THE PLEASANT HILL BART STATION SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT,
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY.
WHEREAS, purusant to the provisions of Government Code 65450, public
hearing was held before the County Planning Commission on January 10, 1984, to
consider an amendment to the Pleasant Hill BART Station Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors approved the
Pleasant Hill BART Station Specific Plan on June 7, 1983, with conceptual changes in the
alignment of Oak Road; and
WHEREAS, subsequent detailed review on Plan implementation including
defining the location of the Oak Road extension alignment; and
WHEREAS, these changes have been developed and reviewed by the County in
consultation with representatives of the Cities of Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek and the
Bay Area Rapid Transit District; and
WHEREAS, the procedures of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Contra Costa County Guidelines to implement this act have been met and the
aforementioned amendment has been adequately covered by the Environmental Impact
Report prepared for the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area General Plan Amendment and
Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, after notice thereof having been lawfully given, whereat all
persons interested therein might appear and be heard; and
WHEREAS, the County Planning Commission having fully reviewed, considered
and evaluated all testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the County Planning Commission
makes the following findings and recommendations on this matter:
I. That the Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with and will further the implemen-
tation of the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area General Plan.
2. That the Specific Plan Amendment will further mitigate some of the impacts
enumerated in the Environmental Impact Report with regard to vehicular and
pedestrian circulation.
���0 � �� W
- 2 -
3. ' That the Specific Plan Amendment with conditions for circulation, access, open
space, densities, common master planning and provisions for implementation of
capital improvements will implement the General Plan and each of its elements and
provide for the public safety.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the County Planning Commission
recommends to the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa that the following
amendments be made to the Pleasant Hill BART Station Specific Plan:
1. The alignment of Oak Road be as shown on the attached "Amended Figure 5".
2. The Open Space land use designation between Subareas 7 and 8 on Figure 5 and within
Subarea Development and Design Provision be eliminated.
3. The Utility/Open Space Corridors land use designation be amended to clarify its
intended use of maintaining visual open space along appropriate rights of way and
preservation of the existing oak trees and creek on, BART property but need not
exclude parking as a use.
4. Subarea 7 be divided into 7A and 7B as shown on "Amended Figure 5" however in the
Subarea Development and Design Provisions area 7A, 7B, and 8 be combined into a
requirement for common master planning. Development rights among the area should
also be allowed transferred.
5. Development potential associated with Subarea 1 be allowed to the transferred to any
development within the Plan area.
6. Tables 1 and 2 be eliminated from the Plan text.
7. Figure 8, The Automobile Circulation Policy Diagram (as well as all other plan
graphics) be amended to reflect the above changes. Access from the Oak Road
extension should continue to be limited as indicated in the plan adopted by the Board
of Supervisors.
8. An assessment district may be established to provide a financing mechanism for
payment of fees. A property owner participating in such assessment district will
receive credit towards the required development fee on a per square foot basis for
the amount of the assessment.
- 3 -
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission instructed the
Planning Staff to prepare this resolution by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners - Davis, Feliz, Best, Nimr, Accornero, Anderson, Aiello
NOES: Commissioners - None
ABSENT: Commissioners - None
ABSTAIN: Commissioners - None
LOUISE P. AIELLO
Chairperson of the Planning Commission of the
County of Contra Costa, State of California
ATTEST:
1
ret4ry ofthe anning mission of the
County Contra ,Costa, State of California
Y
EMMY W
/X �Z_��
ROD
CPp�int Or. ')
j •rWllrry CL
Elena
n a
ryi i i i i.`i•'i.`i i.`i i•`• �
a
• ,
VRi
Gam. •�. = .,.a:� •- �
•�� �i j33 �' l�If(�o
P
14 _
y 14 15
r`Q
t.w� •
0
4
.T-nuary 10, 1984
/ 7
Planning Department Contra Costa County
COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
Tuesday, January 10, 1984
PLEASANT HILL BART STATION SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT:
I. This is a proposal to amend the Pleasant Hill BART Station Specific Plan to include an
implementation section and to further define and refine portions of the Plan.
Il. BACKGROUND:
The County Planning Commission began public hearings on this Specific Plan December
14, 1982, continued the matter to January 11, 1983, at which time the hearing on the EIR
was closed. Staff prepared responses to comments on the EIR and after review by the
Steering Committee recommended certain modifications to the original draft plan. The
Planning Commission, on March 22, 1983, recommended the Plan be approved excluding
the implementation section to allow staff and the Steering Committee additional time to
research implementation techniques. The Commission also recommended certain changes
to the plan most notably the relocation of the northern end of the Oak Road extension in
response to comments from Cal Trans regarding its' intersection with Buskirk/Las Juntas.
On May 3, 1983, and May 24, 1983, the Board of Supervisors held hearings on the Plan and
on June 7, 1983, adopted the Plan with the major changes being the conceptual
realignment of oak Road as recommended by the Planning Commission. The closure of
Las Juntas, the preservation of the entire Elena Court, Elena Drive, Juana Court
residential neighborhood (including the seven lots at the ends of the cul-de-sacs), and the
option for developers to utilize FAR Bonus provisions at the initial construction stage
upon approval by the Board of Supervisors of an agreement to guarantee implementation
of sufficient Transportation System Management techniques so as to comply with the
objectives of the Plan. (Attached is the June 7, 1983 Board of Supervisors order together
with exhibits A and B).
III. PROPOSED AMENDMENT RECOMMENDATIONS:
A. Oak Road Alignment and Associated Plan Changes:
1. The recommended alignment shown on the attached "Amended Figure S" evolved
after a significant amount of discussion with all parties involved.
2. Eliminate the Open Space land use designation between Subareas 7 and 8 on
Figure 5 and within Subarea Development and Design Provisions. (It was
originally anticipated that the Wayne Court right-of-way would need to be
retained because of existing utilities within the right-of-way. Utilities will now
be replaced and can be relocated however references to pedestrian circulation
should remain. This could provide more flexibility in depth or development of
Subarea 8).
PH BART pg. 2
3. The Utility/Open Space Corridors land use designation should be amended to
clarify its intended use of maintaining visual gpen space along appropriate
rights-of-way and preservation of the existing oak trees and creek on BART
property but need not exclude parking as a use. (Currently the Plan excludes
parking other than interim surface parking. With the relocation of Oak Road
westerly .and the knowledge of BART's intention to construct a parking structure
such clarification of intent is necessary.)
4. Subarea 7 should be divided into 7A and 7B as shown on "Amended Figure S"
however in the Subarea Development and Design Provisions areas 7A, 7B, and 8
should be combined into a requirement for common master planning. Develop-
ment rights among the areas should also be allowed to be transferred.
(Currently the Plan allows development FAR transferability between Subarea 8
and 9. With the new alignment of Oak Road the areas have changed in
configuration and Subareas 7A, 7B, and 8 although independently reasonable
aggregations and development areas have significantly more relationship and
common issues such as access and pedestiran and vehicular circulation which
need to be cohesively planned. Transferability of density between these areas is
more appropriate.
S. Development potential associated with Subarea 1 should be allowed to the
transferred to any development within the Plan area. (The biggest development
subarea change resulting from the proposed alignment of the Oak Road right-of-
way is in Subarea 1. The Plan allows for development potential associated with
right-of-way dedications to be utilized on abutting properties. This recommen-
dation would allow the maximum flexibility in land value for the remaining
Subarea 1 while providing the best incentive for developer acquisition of the
properties and dedication of the needed right-of-way. Office development at a
variety of scales could be proposed on Subarea 1 with the potential of selling or
sharing some development potential with other subareas.)
6. A variety of references mandating that the pedestrian bridge over Treat
Boulevard connect directly to the second level plaza areas should be changed to
reflect the intent of the Plan to encourage above grade pedestrian circulation.
(Substantial investigation has gone into designing a pedestrian overcrossing that
is inviting, secure, attractive and provides the best area wide benefit. The exact
location and design have not yet been determined).
7. Eliminate Tables 1 and 2 from the Plan text. (These tables which.reflect subarea
acreage and development potential were included in the Plan for informational
and discussion purposes and although they are clearly noted'as "approximate
acreage" have served to confuse some issues. Data used was based on assessor's
records which may differ from actual surveys. Also development potential can
change if right-of-way is dedicated rather than purchased by the County. The
Floor Area Ratio allowed on Figure 7 the Space and Site Requirements Matrix, is
adequate, accurate and eliminates approximations.
S. Figure 8, The Automobile Circulation Policy Diagram (as well as all other plan
graphics), should be amended to reflect the above changes. Access from the Oak
MEN p
PH BART pg, 3 ._
Road extension should continue to be limited as indicated in the plan adopted by
the Board of Supervisors.
B. Implementation:
I. A Specific Plan Development Fee is recommended at $3.65/square foot
(minimum fee being calculated on the allowable base development for the
subject site). The fee is established to include contribution toward circulation
improvements, transit improvements, preparation of a Transporation Systems
Management (TSM) Plan, recovery of Specific Plan preparation costs,
engineering, and administrative costs.
This fee is to be adjusted annually in accordance with The California Department
of Transportation Summary - Highway Construction Cost Index.
2. An assessment .district may be established to provide a financing mechanism for
payment of fees. A property owner participating in such assessment district will
receive credit towards the required development fee on a per square foot basis
f or the amount of the assessment.
3. A developer proposing to take advantage of the bonus provisions would be
required to pay the development fee for the entire gross square footage of the
approved project (less any applicable credit resulting from assessment district
participation).
4. In addition to the fee requirement above, a developer utilizing the bonus
provisions would have to demonstrate (and be required to execute an agreement
with Contra Costa County agreeing to insure) that traffic and parking impacts
from their bonus development would be at least equal to (if not less than) the
impacts that would have resulted from the development under the base level
provided for in the Plan.
5. Benefit areas are to be included in development fee considerations. Although
the defined Specific Plan covers 125 acres, the impacts of development within
that area will affect surrounding areas as the development of surrounding areas
will affect the Station area. Lines cannot be drawn to limit the effects of
development, therefore the responsibility to improve circulation and transit
systems in the area should not be limited only--to developments within the Plan
area. To be consistent development in the area surrounding the Specific Plan
Area may be required to pay similar fees for circulation improvements and
transit fees.
6. Zoning implementation of the Specific Plan should be the result of individual
(unless combined applications for "master planning" purposes are required within
the subarea) development proposals to the Planned District (P-1) zoning design-
tion with Preliminary and Final Development Plan applications. Existing zoning
shall remain and be considered as a "holding" zone.-until such rezoning is
requested and approved.
Q
j
PH BART pg. 4
7. Any provision of the Specific Plan may be varied, however in approving a
Preliminary or Final Development Plan reflecting a variance from the Plan a
finding must be made that the intent of the Plan is satisfied.
S. Nothing contained in this implementation section should preclude consideration
or adoption of additional implementation programs that further the fulfillment
of the goals and objectives of the Plan (i.e., joint agency agreements or
redevelopment procedures).
IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:
Amend the Pleasant Hill BART Station Specific Plan as recommended above.
DE:plp9adp
1/5/84
t `yYu� ) IIU