Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02111986 - T.7 T.7 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 11, 1986 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Powers NOES : None ABSENT : None ABSTAIN: None -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT : 2656-RZ, DP 3063-85 , DP 3003-862 2658-RZ and DP 3002-86 Pleasant Hill Bart Station Area This being the time for hearing the recommendations of the County Planning Commission on the following: 1 . Application of Hoover Associates & Merle Gilliland (applicants) , and Taylor Woodrow of California Inc. , and Treat Corners Partnership (owners) , to rezone land (2656-RZ) from Single Family Residential (R-15) to Planned Development District (P-1) . 2 . Application for approval of Final Development Plan 3063-85 , Merle D. Gilliland and Wallace Olson Association, Inc. (applicants) and Treat Corners Partnership (owners) for approval of an office building, hotel complex and related parking. 3 . Application for approval of Final Development Plan 3003-86 , Taylor Woodrow of California, Inc. (applicants and owners) for approval of an office project and related parking. 4 . Application of Taylor/Ward Properties (applicant and owners) , to rezone land (2658-RZ) from Single Family Residential District (R-10 & P-1) to Planned Development District (P-1) , and for approval of Final Development Plan 3002-86 , Taylor/Ward Properties (applicant) and Sonspirit Properties (owners) for approval of an office/hotel project. Harvey Bragdon, Assistant Director of Community Development, advised that the County Planning Commission recommends the rezonings and development plans as conditioned be adopted by the Board. Mr. Bragdon briefly described the applications, the pro- posed projects and how each complied with the Pleasant Hill BART Station Area Specific Plan. He reviewed transition of the area from single-family residential to the current development of multiple- family residential and employment centers which meet the jobs/housing balance. He stated that the regional transportation impacts had been addressed through a combination of financing sour- ces and public infrastructure construction and redevelopment. Mr. Bragdon advised that on February 18, 1986 , the County Planning Commission will be addressing the Transportation System Management and Child Care elements of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station Specific Plan. Mr. Progen, Deputy Executive Director of the Redevelopment Agency, reviewed the role of the Redevelopment Agency. He cited this project as an example of making a private/public partnership work. He described the infratstructure and its financing. He also described the development agreement with the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) including the fees and the acerage dedicated to the Redevelopment Agency by BART. 1 r , The Chair declared the hearings open, and the following persons appeared: Donald E. Anderson, 600 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, representing the Property Owners Association, described how the applications culminated many years of coordinated effort of the County, Cities of Pleasant Hill and Walnut Creek, Bart and local citizens. He commented that the technical staff consisted of repre- sentatives from each jurisdiction. Merle D. Gilliland, P . 0. Box 215 , Moraga, President of the Contra Costa Centre Association (the property owners' asso- ciation) and representing Treat Corners Partnership, reviewed the history of the formation of the association. Dick Nystrom, 700 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 320, Walnut Creek, Secretary/Treasurer of the Contra Costa Centre Association, reviewed the steps taken in developing and implementing the projects and gave a brief overview of the programs specifically involving the Association. Evelyn Munn, 35 Sandra Court, Walnut Creek, representing the Walnut Creek City Council , advised that Walnut Creek is con- cerned about future traffic impacts from the development of the Pleasant Hill Bart Station Area and fear it will have a major nega- tive effect on the city roadways . She stated that although the City had contributed money to have the Pleasant Hill Bart Station Specific Plan prepared and had participated in the study, it has very clearly expressed its opposition to three fundamental premises of the plan. 1 . The level of development is excessive for planned capa- city of the streets. 2. Concept of future traffic diversion to non-automobile is unrealistic. 3. Some of proposed office development should instead be for housing. Ms. Munn stated that over the past few years there has been growing concern and frustration over traffic conditions in Contra Costa County, and that the cities are trying to maintain reasonable traffic levels at street intersections . She advised that the Walnut Creek City Council has asked her to represent them in calling for the Board to take strong and decisive action on traffic problems before approving any more developments in the Pleasant Hill Bart Station Area. She also stated that the mitigation measures now being considered are different than those first proposed. Gary Bingham, representing the City of Walnut Creek, requested that the Board immediately proceed with the mandatory review called for in the plan and consider holding off pending developments until that review is completed. Supervisor Fanden asked that Mr. Bingham make copies of his comments available to all members of the Board. Barclay Simpson, representing the BART Board commented that he was a member of the Steering Committee, and that the adopted plan was a first-class project for controlled, responsible growth. He commented that he favored the subject projects with one proviso: that the BART development level not be held up or reduced because it has not yet applied for a specific project . He referred to the Development Agreement between the County and Bart entered into in August, 1985 . He stated that he felt the best place for intense development in the area is right at the BART station because land that was taken off the tax rolls for development of BART can now be put back onto the tax rolls by private development, and that the impact of traffic at the BART station is less than projects approved elsewhere in the nearby cities. 2 Mr. Simpson requested the Board to add to any action taken on the applications a motion indicating that the Board "recognizes that these projects are in addition to the level of development provided for the BART-owned land in the Acquisition and Development Agreement by and between the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Redevelopment Agency, adopted by ordinance by the Board of Supervisors on August 13, 1985 and executed on September 12, 1985 . " Mr. Bragdon then described the Taylor/Ward application which he indicated would provide for extensive pedestrian areas, an attractive place to work, and provide open space and space for visual openess and quality architecture. The following developers, architects, and represen- tatives of the companies involved in said applications appeared and described the various aspects: Loren Ward, owner of Taylor/Ward Geoffrey Heller, of Heller & Leak Merle Gilliland Dave Gates, Landscape Architect Dan Heinfend, representing Veason Pomfray Associates Jay Mitchell, Architect Robert Upton, Taylor/Woodrow Mr. Gilliland stressed the need for moving ahead with the projects, and suggested the review of the specific plan be done concurrently with the proposed projects. Mr. Gilliland proposed wording for a condition of approval dealing with regional traffic impact mitigation, commenting that the developers had participated in two separate fees already and that they would not like to have another 50 cents a square foot added at this late date and were therefore suggesting an alternative providing for a parking fee which they feel to be more fair. Terri Williamson, City Councilwoman of the City of Pleasant Hill, advised that the Mayor and Council had not had an opportunity to review the staff reports and to respond to the propo- sals. She addressed traffic impact and suggested that the results of the proposed hotels in this area are totally unknown at this time. Mr. Bragdon responded that City staffs were notified in the usual manner and there had been a meeting with the Technical. Committee prior to the Planning Commission meeting to go over the details of the plans . He advised that the developers had also reviewed the plans with the city staffs. The following persons appeared in opposition indicating concerns with parking, traffic, utilization of child care centers, level of BART ridership, number of stories proposed for hotels, scale of proposed development, Edgar Hayden, 24 Elmwood Court, Walnut Creek Ed Dimmick, 1251 Sheppard Court, Walnut Creek Dia McCullagh, 3035 Vassing Road, Pleasant Hill Ken Haron, 418 Doulton Copurt, Pleasant Hill Kelli Lin Anderson, 283 Oak Park Lane, Pleasant Hill The Chair read comments in opposition from speakers cards left by Kathryn Haubensak, 214 Greenwich Drive, Pleasant Hill; Esther White, 213 Greenwich Drive, Pleasant Hill; and Gloria Karprielian, 39 Elmwood Court, Walnut Creek. The developers and their representatives appeared in rebuttal and responded to the issues raised by the speakers . No one else having desired to speak, the public hearing was closed. 3 Board members discussed with staff the various issues raised during testimony. Supervisor Fanden requested time to review the information received during testimony today and do personal investigation in some of the issues of concern to her. Supervisor McPeak reviewed the process made in developing the Specific Plan and in following that plan and advised that she was prepared to support the plan. Supervisor Schroder advised that he also was ready to sup- port the plan. Supervisor Torlakson advised he too supported the plans submitted today, but that he disagreed with some of the langauge in the Contra Costa Centre Association' s proposal providing for a parking fee rather than a regional traffic impact mitigation fee, and sumitted revised language for consideration and inclusion in the conditions of approval . IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that decision on the above applications is DEFERRED to February 25 , 1986 at 9 :00 a.m. and the staff is directed to prepare a report for the Board' s review. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that County Counsel is requested to review the motion suggested by BART with respect to fees . Supervisor Powers requested that BART'S motion be acted on at the same time as the Board makes a decision on the above applica- tions. Supervisor McPeak announced that the Steering Committee has been reactivated at her request and will be meeting prior to February 25 . I heraby certify that thlt It a true r..es I CCIr~rf.' of an action taken anti enauned aft the rrrfnutes of the Board of Supervisors on the data,shown. ATTESTED: ��1,, 1.l�.� PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board j of Supervisors and County Administrator By ,Deputy cc: Community Development County Counsel 4 T.7 a THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 11, 1986 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson and Powers NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None -------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Proposal for reimbursement and loan agreement with Contra Costa Centre Association relative to the development of a TSM & Child Care Program This being the time for consideration of a proposal for a reimbursement and loan agreement with the Contra Costa Centre Association for development of Transportation Systems Management and Child Care Programs in the Pleasant Hill Bart Station area; and Supervisor Schroder advised that he had some questions with respect to the proposal and would like some time to review it with staff. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the consideration of the aforesaid agreement is DEFERRED to February 25 , 1986 as a deter- mination item. 1 hereby certify that thin trg a fn1p p jf cast ct cow of I"action taken and en6e:e4 on:h3 st:lrotcte of the Boats of Supervisor �n the Bete shovrn. ATTEStED. - � PHIL ®QTCHEl013, Clcslc f the 13©9tet Of SuperviSOn and County Administrator By Deputy cc: Community Development County Counsel County Administrator f BOARD OF SUPERVISORS • PFROM: Finance Committee Contra (Supervisors R. I . Schroder and T. Torlakson) Costa DATE: February 10, 1986 Cort/ SUBJECT: Bethel Island Specific Plan ��+' 11r SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION AUTHORIZE a loan of up to $50,000 from the Special District Augmentation Fund to the Bethel Island Fire Protection District and County Sanitation District No. 15 to help finance the preparation of a Specific Plan for the Bethel Island/Sandmound Slough Area. FINANCIAL IMPACT The Special District Augmentation Fund balance will eventually be depleted by up to $50,000 , as the funds are needed. However, this loan will be repaid to the Fund from future development fees. BACKGROUND For the last several years, various community and public agencies in the Bethel Island area have requested the use of some Special District Augmen- tation Fund money to finance development of a Specific Plan for the Bethel Island/Sandmound Slough area. Agencies having requested these funds include County Sanitation District No. 15 , the Bethel Island Fire Protec- tion District, Reclamation District No. 799, and the Bethel Island Munici- pal Improvement District. Some initial work toward the beginning of a Specific Plan has been accomplished with the use of private funds and a grant received from the San Francisco Foundation. It is anticipated that the recommended loan of money will encourage the Bethel Island community residents to generate additional required funds. This financial commitment by the county will also strengthen the Improvement District' s application to the San Francisco Foundation for a Specific Plan grant. It is expected that the total cost of preparing the Specific Plan and Environmental Impact Report will be about $200 , 000. Both the Bethel Island Fire Protection District and County Sanitation District No. 15 will be directly impacted by development which occurs in the Bethel Island/Sandmound Slough area. The use of Special District Augmentation Fund money to help finance the Specific Plan preparation is appropriate in that both districts have a direct interest in planning to meet community demands for services. CONTINUED ON ATTACHME YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION C UN ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ob rt Schroder, Chairman Tom Torlakson ACTION OF BOARD ON ��. O APPROVED'AS RECOMMENDED OTHER _ VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TARN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN, cc: CAO ATTESTED --- PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382/7-83 BY �' �� DEPUTY