HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02142012 - SD.7RECOMMENDATION(S):
ADOPT Special Rules of Procedure for the public hearing to be held by the Board of
Supervisors on the Sufism Reoriented sanctuary project proposed in the Walnut Creek area.
FISCAL IMPACT:
None. The cost of the application is paid for by the applicant. Each appellant has paid a
$125.00 appeal fee.
BACKGROUND:
Sufism Reoriented submitted two applications in 2008 for a sanctuary project proposed for
the Walnut Creek area. A minor subdivision application was submitted to merge seven
parcels into one parcel, and a land use permit application was submitted to allow for a
66,000 square foot sanctuary building on 3.12 acres in unincorporated Walnut Creek.
Approximately 46,074 square feet of the building would be located below ground. In
addition, the proposal includes a request for parking reduction based on a Transportation
Demand Management Program (TDMP), removal of 58 trees, excavation and removal of
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 02/14/2012 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
ABSENT:Gayle B. Uilkema, District II
Supervisor
Contact: Lashun Cross,
925-674-7786
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: February 14, 2012
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
SD. 7
To:Board of Supervisors
From:Catherine Kutsuris
Date:February 14, 2012
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Special Rules of Procedure for Board of Supervisors Public Hearing on the Sufism Reoriented Sanctuary
Project
approximately 40,000 cubic yards of soil and demolition of three existing single- family
residences.
Before staff deemed both applications complete, approximately 3,000 letters were received
by the Department of Conservation and Development. On March 29, 2011, the Draft
Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) was distributed to the public, and approximately
62 letters were received and responded to in the Final EIR. More than 30 letters were
submitted to the County Planning Commission. Four public hearings were held by the
County Planning Commission on the applications. Approximately 435 speaker cards were
received, and 150 speakers testified. On November 8, 2011, the County Planning
Commission approved the project with modifications to the conditions of approval.
Eleven appeals were filed on that approval, including an appeal by the project applicant. The
project applicant has informed the Department that 400 supporters of the project will attend
the Board of Supervisors hearing. As such, attendance may exceed 500.
Because of the number of appeals and the large number of people expected to be present and
testify, it is necessary to hold the public hearing on the proposal at a location other than the
Board of Supervisors’ chambers in Martinez. Staff also believes it is appropriate to adopt
Special Rules of Procedure for this public hearing. The Board of Supervisors previously
adopted general rules of procedure that apply to all Board of Supervisors meetings.
(Resolution No. 2009/12.) The special rules contained in this Board Order are intended to
serve in place of Procedural Rule 12 pertaining to public hearings for planning and zoning
matters. Staff believes that these special rules will provide for a more orderly public hearing
process on the Sufism Reoriented sanctuary project and will give the Board of Supervisors a
better opportunity to hear from members of the public who would like to participate within
the time that has been set aside for the hearing of this matter.
These Special Rules of Procedure are intended to be a guideline for the Board of
Supervisors, but may be altered by the Board or the Chair of the Board during the course of
the hearing as the Board or the Board Chair may deem appropriate. These Special Rules of
Procedure are procedural only. The failure to strictly observe application of the Special
Rules of Procedure shall not affect the jurisdiction of the Board or invalidate any action
taken at this meeting.
Attached is a copy of Rule 11 and 12 of the Board’s General Rules of Procedure pertaining
to the conduct of meetings. Rule 11, and all other applicable matters contained in Resolution
2009/12, will apply to the conduct of this hearing.
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
TIME AND LOCATION.
The public hearing will begin at 9:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February 21, 2012 and end at 4:00
p.m., unless determined otherwise by a majority of the Board.
The public hearing will be held at the Lesher Center for the Arts, Hoffmann Theater,
located at 1601 Civic Drive, Walnut Creek. A parking garage is located between Locust
Street and California Boulevard.
RULES OF PROCEDURE. In addition to the Board’s general procedural rules, the
following Special Rules of Procedure will apply at the public hearing:
A. ORDER OF PRESENTATION.
1. Open the Public Hearing. The Chair will open the public hearing.
2. Presentation by Staff. Staff may make a presentation of relevant issues and
information at the beginning of the hearing.
3. Documents. The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors will provide Community
Development staff with copies of any documents that are not included in a staff report to
the Board and that are filed with the Clerk at times other than during the hearing. As part
of its presentation, Community Development staff will acknowledge the placement of
these documents into the record of the hearing.
4. Appellants’ Presentations. Each appellant other than the project applicant may make a
presentation. Each appellant’s presentation shall not exceed five minutes.
5. Project Applicant’s Presentation. The project applicant may make a presentation. The
project applicant’s presentation shall not exceed thirty minutes.
6. Public Testimony. Each speaker will be allowed one opportunity to provide public
comment, which will not exceed two minutes.
7. Appellants’ Rebuttals . Each appellant other than the project applicant may make a
rebuttal. Each appellant’s rebuttal shall not exceed three minutes.
8. Project Applicant’s Rebuttal. The project applicant may make a rebuttal. The project
applicant’s rebuttal shall not exceed thirty minutes.
9. Closing Comments by Staff. Staff may make comments to the Board prior to the close
of the hearing.
10. Close the Public Hearing. The Chair will close the public hearing.
11. Board Discussion and Decision. No further evidence from the public (including the
applicant and the appellants), either oral or in writing, will be admitted into the record
after the public hearing is closed or during the Board’s deliberation of the matter.
B. CONDUCT OF HEARING.
1. Seating. The Conservation and Development Department will reserve 40 seats at the
front of the Hoffmann Theater for the appellants and the project applicants (20 for the
appellants and 20 for the applicant).
2. Call of Speakers . The Chair will call between 10 and 20 names at one time from the
speaker cards. When names are called, those speakers will queue along the side aisles to
await their turn to speak. Conservation and Development staff will be available to assist
the speakers as needed.
3. Rules of Evidence. The hearing will not be conducted according to technical judicial
rules of evidence. Any relevant evidence may be considered if it is the sort of evidence
on which responsible persons are accustomed to rely in the conduct of serious affairs.
The Chair may make such rulings as may be necessary for the orderly conduct of the
proceedings and a full airing of the issues involved.
C. Correspondence Received.
Robert C. Nuzum (appellant) has requested that the Board consider ten separate hearings
for each appeal filed. Attached is a copy of the email. The item before the Board is one
project; the decision on this application cannot be segmented into 10 distinct hearings
and decisions.
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without special rules, the hearing may not proceed as smoothly, and may result in an
inefficient use of the time set aside for the hearing. As a consequence, the Board of
Supervisors might not be able to hear from as many people or have as a clear record of
the hearing as it could with the Special Rules of Procedure in place.
CLERK'S ADDENDUM
Speakers: Robert Nuzum, resident of Walnut Creek (appellant); Richard Galton,
Saranap Homeowners Association (appellant); Stuart Flashman, Saranap
Homeowners Association (appellant); Patricia Perry, resident of Lafayette (appellant);
Marie Cooper, Perkins Coie, legal representation for applicant. The Board adopted the
Recommendations with the following revisions to the Special Rules of Procedure: 4.
Appellant Presentations. Each appellant other than the project applicant may make a
presentation, Each appellant's presentation shall not exceed seven minutes. 5. Project
Applicant's Presentation and Rebuttal. The project applicant will have the right to
make an initial presentation and a rebuttal. The project applicant will have a total of
70 minutes for both purposes. The applicant may divide the time between presentation
and rebuttal at the applicant's discretion, provided that the combined time for both
initial presentation and the rebuttal may not exceed 70 minutes. 8. Project Applicant's
Rebuttal. Deleted (this was superseded by the modification to Special Rule 5). 11.
Board Discussion and Decision. No further evidence from the public (including the
applicant and the appellants) either oral or in writing, will be admitted into the record
after the public hearing is closed or during the Board's deliberation of the matter
except that information provided in response to an inquiry from a Supervisor shall be
admitted into the record.
ATTACHMENTS
Rules 11 & 12
Robert C. Nuzum email
From: Robert Nuzum
<mailto:robert.nuzum@yahoo.com_mailto:robert.nuzum@yahoo.com_robert.nuzum@yahoo.com>
To: "mailto:dist3@BOS.CCCounty.us_mailto:dist3@BOS.CCCounty.us_dist3@BOS.CCCounty.us"
<mailto:dist3@BOS.CCCounty.us_mailto:dist3@BOS.CCCounty.us_dist3@BOS.CCCounty.us>
Cc: robert nuzum
<mailto:robert.nuzum@yahoo.com_mailto:robert.nuzum@yahoo.com_robert.nuzum@yahoo.com>
Sent: Friday, February 3, 2012 11:11 AM
Subject: Considering Protocols for Saranap Homeowner Appeals
Good morning Mary:
My wife Judy and I are long-term Saranap residents (since 1968) and members of
the Saranap Homeowners Organization (SHO). We are adamantly opposed to the
NEW Sufism Reoriented Religious Facility being proposed close to our home for a
host of land use reasons which have been provided to the County to no avail to-date.
I am also a member of the SHO "working group" who have submitted nine appeals
on the decisions arrived at by the Planning Commission.
These appeals are scheduled to be heard on Feb 21. I am asking you to support the
need for ten separate hearings. We are hearing that these appeals may be bundled
together and feel that this would be a very poor decision. Please consider that these
individual residents did not feel that the County staff or Planning Commission
wanted to hear what they had to say through this lengthy process. They have now
appealed to the BOS, filed their paperwork and paid their filing fee and they deserve
their appeal to be heard by the Supervisors and a determination made prior to
hearing the second Appeal and so on.
I can appreciate that this treatment of each Appeal would take more of your time but
it is the right thing to do for these neighbors. The SHO represents more than 800
families in the Saranap which is substantial. Sufism members live primarily in
rentals close to their current church and their membership represents about 2.5% of
those voting in the Saranap and the great majority do NOT pay property taxes. To
date, Sufism Reoriented has been granted unfettered access to the County staff and,
with all due respect, the SHO membership cannot stand the thought of having these
appeals bundled together and having to listen to Sufism advocates badger the
Saranap residents for some 50 minutes, all at the same time.
Thanks for your consideration Mary,
Bob Nuzum
____________________________________________________________________
______________
Robert C. Nuzum
Owner and Lead Scientist
Applied Natural Resource Management
1072 Juanita Drive
Walnut Creek, CA 94595
(925) 939-7436 home
(925) 360-0025 cell
(925) 938-8556 fax
Emeritus Certified Scientist
http://www.nuzumconservation.com/_http://www.nuzumconservation.com/_www.nuzumconse
rvation.com