Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01221985 - T.2 (3) THE BOARD -OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA r Adopted this Order on January 229 1985 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers , Schroder and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisors Fanden and McPeak ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Proposed Area of Benefit for Bridge and/or Major Thoroughfare for the Oakley Area This being the time for hearing on the proposed Area of Benefit for Bridge and/or Major Thoroughfare for the Oakley Area; and Mr . Michael Walford , Public Works Director , reviewed the necessity for such a benefit area as well as the boundaries and estimated cost , and recommended that the Board proceed with the formation of such an area even though roads had recently been added to the scope of the study on Oakley area infrastructure currently underway by Ralph Anderson . The Chair declared the hearing open , and read remarks sub- mitted by Susan Lowell relating to a permit for her property and suggesting that the cost of roads and signals should be a county- wide responsibility . Mr . Dean LaField , representing the Building Industry of Northern California , appeared and urged delay of the formation of an Area of Benefit until after the Ralph Anderson Study is completed . Mr . LaField also stated his objection to the recommended cost alloca- tion of fees . Mr . Gordon Gravelle , on behalf of LAG Partnership, appeared and objected to the proposed fee designation to each type of land use , stating the fee structure is inequitable and that it favors residental and light industrial development at the expense of the commercial developer , and suggested that new commercial develop- ment would reduce traffic by reducing the distance people must drive to shop. Mr . Harry Tassel appeared and proposed that everyone in the area be taxed for roads , not just new people . Mr . William Harvey, representing the Oakley Municipal Advisory Committee (OMAC) appeared and requested postponement of the matter so that OMAC would have an opportunity to discuss priorities for the plan . Mr . Marvin Newell , property owner , appeared and objected to the imposition of a fee at the building permit stage . Mr . Charles Pringle , property owner , objected to adding additional fees to the cost of new homes and urged that the cost of roads be spread county-wide . Mr . Fred Cline , President of the Oakley Chamber of Commerce , opposed the Area of Benefit and urged spreading the cost of road improvements throughout the Eastern portion of the County and requested the this hearing be continued to provide the Chamber additional time to study the matter . 3.3 The Board considered the testimony presented and further discussed the matter . IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that said hearing is CONTINUED to February 12, 1985 at 10: 30 a.m . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that staff is REQUESTED to review : 1 . The scope of the proposed boundaries , 2. The total amount of the various fees now being collected on new building in the Oakley area , 3. The total amount of the various fees now being collected on new building in the Brentwood and Antioch areas , 4. The conflicting testimony on whether distribution of fees among commercial , business and residential is equitable , 5 . The Building Industry' s request that action be deferred pending results of the Ralph Anderson Study, 6. Whether the cost estimates include the cost of landscaping road medians , sidewalks and side landscaping, and if not , provide the Board with a rough estimate of. those costs . IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Public Works staff is REQUESTED to participate with the Planning Department and OMAC in a public forum being held on February 4, 1985 to discuss the General Plan in the Oakley area , and to answer questions that the Chamber of Commerce and property owners may have with respect to this matter . 1 hereby certify that this iv a tr.W and corrc y!copy of an action taken and entered on the adnutes of the Board of Superviscra on the:fate shown. ATTESTED: , -2 a,,/ S eS PHIL BATC IOR.Cto*of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator I. By +Deputy cc: Public Works Director Director of Planning County Counsel County Administrator