The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 10221985 - T.4 T.4 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY , CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on October 22z 1985 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers , Schroder , McPeak , Torlakson and Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment , Clyde area This being the time for hearing on the recommendation of the County Planning Commission with respect to the request of Westmont Company for a general plan amendment to redesignate approximately twelve acres of land from Single Family Residential High Density, Parks and Recreation, and Neighborhood Business to Multiple Family Residential High Density located between Medburn and Sussex Streets east of Port Chicago Highway in the Clyde area. Maurice Huguet , Attorney for the Westmont Company , advised that staff had recommended approval of the subject amendment , that the amendment had been through exhaustive hearings before the County Planning Commission and that the Planning Commission had recommended approval . Mr . Huguet then submitted to Board members a list of pro- posed modifications to the proposed amendment which he advised were in keeping with staff' s recommended modifications . He stated that Westmont Company wished to withdraw its request to relocate the ten- nis court so that the community of Clyde might go forward with its plans for the tennis court . Board members discussed with Mr . Huguet the proposed modi- fications he had submitted to them, particularly the proposal to increase the density. The Chairwoman declared the hearing open and the following persons appeared: 1 . Dan Tikalsky , representing the Concord Naval Weapons Station , who expressed concerns with respect to increased con- centration of human habitation next to an area where an explosion might occur , and to the potential for increased accidents involving ammunition trucks due to increased traffic . 2. Nick Murgia, 326 Wellington Avenue , Clyde , who advised that the townspeople did not want development to occur for many reasons . 3. Juanita Price , 146 Park Street , Clyde , who advised that she was against any change from the General Plan Amendment adopted by the Board of Supervisors in 1979 , particularly apart- ments , and that she wanted the park left as it is and no streets vacated . 4. Vickie Murgia , 326 Wellington Avenue , Clyde , who pre- sented a petition containing approximately 193 signatures endorsing the existing general plan and opposing the proposed amendment . 5 . Phil Minard , 128 Wellington Avenue , Clyde , who wished to keep the narrow streets and family atmosphere . 6 . Susan J . R . Newton, 162 Wellington Avenue , Clyde , who submitted a letter in opposition to the proposed amendment . 1 7 . Loren Welehes , a member of the Citizen' s Advisory Committee of County Service Area M-16 , who opposed the proposed amendment . 8. Dee Kilcoyne , 140 Norman Avenue , Clyde , Chairwoman of the Citizen' s Advisory Committee for County Service Area M-16 , com- mented that it appeared that the general plan had been expanded to include the railroad right-of-way after the hearing was closed . She stated that she was opposed to approval even if were to be medium density . 9, Maurice Huguet , attorney for Westmont Company, appeared in rebuttal and responded to questions raised , and talked about the history of the use of the land . He commented that with respect to the tennis court , Westmont Company did not want it held up any longer and is willing to have it built where it was originally intended . The Chair read speakers cards from Ed Dimmick, Chair of the Citizens for a Better Contra Costa, with attached letter expressing concerns about the appropriateness of the proposed deve- lopment and recommending denial of the general plan amendment , and from Michael Haile of San Jose who is contemplating buying in Clyde and who opposes the proposed development . No one else having appeared to speak, the Chair declared the hearing closed . Supervisor McPeak discussed the modifications to the general plan amendment proposed by Westmont and advised if a development were to occur , it should be done in a way to provide amenities to the community and that is still being opposed here . Supervisor McPeak moved to deny the request for the pro- posed general plan amendment . Supervisor Torlakson seconded the motion, commenting that he was not aware when he first learned of the project that the County had gone through a general plan amend- ment and rezoning to make .Clyde a single family area . He commented that it is disconserting to the local community to have someone buy land and request changes when the community had just established what the rules were , but that he was not opposed to density or den- sity bonuses inasmuch as the County does need that kind of housing, it is just a matter of where it is placed . Supervisor Schroder advised that he would have to vote against the motion to deny because of strong staff and Planning Commission support for approval and because of the Board' s policy with respect to jobs and housing balance , but he would like to have time to give more consideration to the testimony given by both the residents and the applicant relative to use of this particular par- cel of property. Supervisor Powers advised that he would tend to want to go along with the concerns of the residents in this particular situation but that there are other policies that have to be con- sidered and given the importance of the nature of this matter he would like a little more time to look at the area and see what the actual impacts on the area are and to see if there is some area of compromise that can occur . Supervisor Fanden advised that she had taken a field trip to Clyde not too long ago , but that she would like to go back again and take another look , and to again consider any further criteria developed by staff . Supervisor Powers suggested continuing discussion of the matter to afford an opportunity to work with the developer and the community. Supervisor McPeak commented that it appears that there is not support for single family designation, but in looking at the 2 amendment from a planning view she would have to reject the modifi- cations handed to the Board members this day by the developer , and look at what is appropriate , in addition to PUD , that is being recom- mended by the Planning Commission, including a requirement that the developer examine and incorporate into it mixed use of homeowner and rental and senior housing, retain Medburn Street access to the eastern part of the community and appropriate improvements to the Port Chicago Highway to accommodate traffic . As recommended by Supervisor McPeak , decision is DEFERRED to October 29, 1985 , and the Planning Staff is requested to prepare comments on whether there is potential for getting the community and the developer to work together , if there are design considerations that can add to the discussion, ownership vs rentals and inclusion in the general plan boundaries of railroad lands . 1 hereby certify that this is a truo and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Superviso on the date shown. ATTESTED. na PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator cc: Community Development County Counsel By Deputy County Administrator Public Works Director Westmont Company c/o Maurice Huguet Dee Kilcoyne , Chairwoman CSA M-16 3 I 1 . General Plan hrg contd to 10-29-85 2. Clyde area land use and recreation