HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10061987 - T.5 To:' _ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS \
Harvey E. Bragdon, �tra` \
FROM ..;. Director of Community Development
Costa
DATE : August 18 , 1987 couly
D & M DEVELOPMENT ( 2723-RZ) , Development Plan #3029-87 & Sub-
SUBJECT. division #6958 - Pacheco area (S.D.II ) .
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S ) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
INTRODUCTION
Hearing on the Pacheco Manor project consisting of three
concurrent applications: Rezoning 2723-RZ to rezone 2 acres
from Limited Office (0-1 ) to Planned Unit District (P-1)I;
Final Development Plan File #3029-87 to allow 22 townhouse units;
and Subdivision 6958 to allow 22 lots, filed by D & M Development
Company in the Pacheco area. The hearing is also to consider a
determination by the Airport Land Use Commission that the project
would be INCONSISTENT with their noise element policies.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Approve Rezoning File #2723-RZ, Final Development Plan
3029-87 and Subdivision 6958 with the conditions attached in
Exhibit A as recommended by the County Planning Commission.
Due to the ALUC determination, approval will require a
minimum two-thirds majority.
2. Adopt the Planning Commission' s findings as set for'ith in its
Resolution #40-1987 , as the basis for this decision,.
3 . Adopt the additional findings listed below.
n
4. Introduce the ordinance giving effect to the. rezoning file
3723-RZ, waive reading and set a date for adoption of same.
REVIEW OF ALUC DETERMINATION
The Airport Land use Commission has determined that this project
is inconsistent with their noise element policies. State law
requires added consideration before the Board may override the
ALUC. To approve the project, Section 21676(b) of the Public
Resources Code requires that:
1. The Board must make specific findings that the project is
consistent with the State law purposes, that is, . it is in
the public interest to provide for the qkderly development
of each public use airport and the area rro ndin isuch
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT; X YES SIGNATUR
u
_ RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECO ION O RD OMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S1: -
ACTION OF BOARD ON October 6 , 1987 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
I4
See page two for hearing minutes and additional motions.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY.THAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTI''ON TAKEN
14
AYES: NOES'. AND ENTERED ON THE MIPiLJTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATEISHOWN.
cc: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ATTESTED October 6 , 1987 _
County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
D & M Development Company SUPERVISORS AND COUii NTY ADMINISTRATOR
Pacheco Town Council
Public Works
. BY DEPUTY
M382/7B lding Inspection
onsOlidated Fire Protection Dist.
`* s OF PVe
4 Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place, Martinez, CA 94553-4392 (4151689-3890
ONOW J.VOLAWCM Xq
C $, peef Engrxer
C.
JAMES L PMARo
CO~br e,e onvict
" JOKE E.44MIUA i
I,h
Seaewy W v e ouvia
May 4, 1987 of
r.
n.
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
County Administration Bldg. �
P.O.
ox 9
1 5
Martinez, CA 94553
ATTENTION: MR. BYRON 'TURNER
Gentlemen:
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
SD 6958, 3029-87, 2723 RZ
APN: 125-155-028
WS: 24
THOMAS BROS. LOC. : 13A7
The above referenced project has been reviewed by this office,.
The project site is within the CCCSD boundaries and sewers have,l been
planned for this area. An eight-inch public sewer must be, extended by
the developer to serve each parcel (residential or commercial ;; lot,
townhouse unit, condominium building or apartment complex, as
appropriate) to provide gravity service. A ten-foot exclusive public
sewer easement must be established over the alignment of any public main
not located within a public road to provide access for future
maintenance.
The Sanitary District must review and approve any construction I,plans
involving work on the public sewer system. District's Permit Section
will receive and process the construction plans.
Sincerely,
/Y
Jack H. Case
Associate Engineer
J HC:be
D)
f
2.
I
airport in such a manner, among other things, to promote the
overall goals and objectives of the California airport noise
standards, and prevent the creation of new noise problems.
2. Board approval must be by a minimum two-thirds .vote. l"'
RECOMMENDED AIRPORT RELATED FINDINGS
1. The ALUC has established noise compatibility standards for
the area around the airport. The Pacheco Manor site is
located nearly one-half mile beyond the area designated as
noise-sensitive on the ALUC's Noise Element Map.
2. The County's noise element map is in accord with the ALUC' s
map; it also indicates that the Pacheco Manor site is
approximately one-half mile from a designated area which is
vulnerable to airport generated noise.
3. The applicant, D & M Development Company, has acted in good
faith with the County in pursuing a residential project in
accord with a general plan revision approved by the Board of
Supervisors. Denial of the project would constitute an
economic hardship on the applicant.
4. The Pacheco Manor project ostensibly complies with the
County and ALUC Noise Element policies. A denial of the
project on the basis of airport incompatibility might be
vulnerable to challenge as an arbitrary action.
Hearing October 6, 1987:
Mary Fleming, Community Development Department,-, described
the project location, commented that the project complies with the
General Plan designation and is considered an infill project and the
Pacheco Town Council had recommended approval of the project with
conditions, and the Planning Commission had approved theproject. Ms.
Flemming also commented that the Airport Land Use Commission deter-
mined the project was inconsistent with their noise element, and for
the Board of Supervisors to approve the project and over .de the
Airport Land Use Commission they would have to have a two thirds vote
of the Board of Supervisors and make specific findings. ; The staff
recommendation was to approve the project and make the findings.
Supervisor Powers questioned Mike Walford, Public Works
Director, on the memo Mr. Walford sent pointing out noticing problems
to the Airport Land Use Commission and the Airport `Advisory Committee
and whether the project is in or out of the area of the Airport Land
Use Commission' s consideration.
Mr. Walford responded to Supervisor Powers concerns.',
Supervisor Schroder questioned the basis for Airport' Land
Use Commission recommendations and how noise complaints are handled.
Mr. Walford responded to Supervisor Schroder' s concerns.
Bob Drake, Community Development Department and staff
person to the Airport Land Use Commission, commented on the Airport
Land Use Commission' s position on the project urging keeping the
limited office zoning.
victor Westman, County Counsel, commented on the Airport
Land Use Commission Resolution 4-87-ALUC.
The public hearing was opened and the following people
appeared to speak:
Eric Hasseltine, 2380 Salvio Street, #3 , Concord, repre-
senting D & M Development Company, applicant, commented on the
project, and issues including noise problems and potential complaints,
soft noise or visual noise and requested approval of the ',iiproject with
recommended conditions;
V
� . 3 .
Harry Basse, Chairman of the Aviation Advisory Committee,
commented on the Board' s charge to the Aviation Advisory Committee and
the Airport Land Use Commission to protect residents near the airport,
traffic patterns, the inappropriateness of the requested use for this
land, and requested Community Development Department, the Aviation
Advisory Committee, and the Airport Land Use Commission to work
together on future development;
Dorothy Elsinius, Pacheco Town Council, commented on issues
including, the Pacheco Town Council approval of this plan for this
property, helicopter noises, the need for affordable housing and
recommended better policing, and requested approval for the project;-
Grace Ellis, 1718 Via Delberta, Concord, Vice Chairman of
the Airport Land Use Commission, spoke on issues including noise
complaints not being taken lightly and referred to the Bank of America
building project and -resulting noise complaints;
Eric Hasseltine spoke in rebuttal.
The public hearing was closed.
The board discussed the matter.
Supervisor McPeak recommended approval of the project and
expressed hope there would be better communications between the
Airport Land Use Commission, the Airport Advisory Committee and
involved parties. Supervisor McPeak moved approval of the project and
support of the Planning Commission recommendations and denial of the
position of the. Airport Land Use Commission.
Supervisor McPeak additionally moved to direct the Communi-
ty Development Department to assure that all future projects located
within the boundaries of the sphere of the Airport Land Use Commission
hereafter be referred to the Airport Land Use Commission before action
by the Planning. Commission.
Supervisor McPeak requested Mike Walford, Public Works
Director, confer with the Pacheco Town Council for the location of a
town hall for Pacheco.
Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that recommendations
1, 2, 3 , and 4 are APPROVED, and as in recommendation 4, Ordinance No.
87-83 is INTRODUCED, reading waived, and October 20, 1987 is set for
adoption of same; and all future projects located within the bounda-
ries of the sphere of the Airport Land Use Commission are hereafter
REFERRED to the Airport Land Use Commission before action by the
Planning Commission; and the Director of Public Works is REQUESTED to
confer with the Pacheco Town Council on the location for a town hall.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT PLAN 3029-87
1. Development shall be as shown on revised plans dated received by the
Community Development Department June 5, 1987. The guide for development
and use provisions shall be the Single Family Residential District (R-6)
except as-indicated on plans approved with this permit••
2. This approval is subject to adoption of an Ordinance for the rezoning of
the subject property under application 2723-RZ.
3. The proposed buildings shall be similar to that shown on submitted plans. '
Prior to the issuance of a building permit elevations and architectural
design of the buildings and types of materials shall be submitted for final
review and approval by the County Zoning Administrator. The roofs and
exterior walls of the building shall be free of such objects as air
conditioning or utility meter equipment, television aerials, etc. , or they
shall be screened from view. Any modification of plans approved with this
permit or building additions shall be determined by the Zoning Adminis-
trator.
4. Comply with landscaping requirements as follows:
A. A landscaping program for all areas shown on the submitted plans shall
be submitted for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator.
B. California native species shall be used as much as possible. All
trees shall be 15 gallon size, all shrubs shall be a 5 gallon size.
Landscaping shall comply with the Contra Costa County policy on water
conservation requirements for new developments.
C. The existing trees in the vicinity, of proposed building #5 at the
westerly boundary shall be preserved. Evergreen screening trees shall
be provided at north and south boundaries.
D. Landscaping maintenance with the right of way areas of Pacheco Boule-
vard and Temple Drive shall be provided by the landscape maintenance
in the area (see Condition #11F below) .
5. Provide for a masonry wall having a height of not less than 6 feet or more
than 8 feet along the entire frontage of Pacheco Boulevard at the rear yard
areas. The wall shall be slumpstone or have the appearance of slumpstone
to relate to the existing wall adjacent to the south, subject to review and
approval by the Zoning Administrator.
6. The exterior lighting shall be deflected so as not to shine toward adjacent
properties.
7. Each unit shall have address numbers that are clearly visible day and night
to the street.
2.
8. If archaeologic materials are uncovered during grading, trenching or other
on-site excavation, earthwork within 30 meters of these materials shall be
stopped until a professional archaeologist who is certified by the Society
for California Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional
Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of
the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures, if they are deemed
necessary.
9. Sewage disposal serving the properties concerned in this application will
be provided by the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. Each individual
living unit shall be served by a separate sewer connection. The sewers
located within the boundaries of the properties concerned will become an
integral part of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District's sewerage
collection system.
10. Water supply serving the properties concerned shall be by the Contra Costa
Water District. Such water distribution system located within the bound-
aries of the properties concerned in this application, will become an
integral part of the Contra Costa Water District's overall water distri-
bution system. Each individual living unit will be served by a separate
water connection.
11. Comply with drainage, road improvement, traffic and utility requirements as
follows:
A. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the County Ordinance Code, this
subdivision shall conform to the provisions of the County Subdivision
Ordinance (Title 9) . Any exceptions therefrom must be specifically
listed in this conditional approval statement.
B. Construct the on-site driveway system to current County private road
standards with a minimum width of 16 feet.
C. Comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance
for Pacheco Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
D. Prevent storm drainage, originating on the property and conveyed in a
concentrated manner, from draining across the sidewalk and driveways.
E. Furnish proof to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services
Division, of the acquisition of all necessary rights of entry, permits
and/or easements for the construction of off-site, temporary or
permanent, road and drainage improvements.
F. Apply for annexation to County Landscaping District AD 1979-3 (LL-2).
G. Prior to issuance of building permits, file the Final Map for
Subdivision 6958.
J
L"LituUIU
3.
The following statements are not conditions of approval , however, the applicant
should be aware of these comments prior to filing the Final Subdivision Map or
attempting to secure building permits.
1. The Contra Costa County Consolidated Fire Protection District. See
attached.
2. The Contra Costa Central Sanitary District. See attached.
BT/aa
6/19/87
RZVII/3029-87C.BT
,.7rnnn�t
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION 6958
1. This approval is based upon the .Tentative Map submitted with the applica-
tion dated May 12, 1987. ._Prior to filing this final map a revision map
shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator
conforming to the Development Plan 3029-87.
2. Comply with drainage, road improvement, traffic and utility requirements as
follows:
A. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the County Ordinance Code, this
subdivision shall conform to the provisions of the County Subdivision
Ordinance (Title 9). Any exceptions therefrom must be specifically
listed in this conditional approval statement.
B. Construct the on-site driveway system to current County private road
standards with a minimum width of 16 feet.
C. Comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance
for Pacheco Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
D. Prevent storm drainage, originating on the property and 'conveyed in a
concentrated manner, from draining across the sidewalk and driveways.
E. Furnish proof to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services
Division, of the acquisition of all necessary rights of entry, permits
and/or easements for the construction of off-site, temporary or
permanent, road and drainage improvements.
F. Apply for annexation to County Landscaping District AD 1979-3 (LL-2).
G. Prior to issuance of building permits, file the Final Map for
Subdivision 6958.
3. Provide Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (C.C. & R. 's) for
Subdivision 6958, subject to review and approval by the Zoning Adminis-
trator to include the following:
A. No recreational vehicle, boat trailer or mobilehome shall be stored
within the project including overnight parking.
B. Provision for landscape maintenance at street frontages.
C. Provision for street maintenance of the private road street loop
extending from Pacheco Boulevard.
D. Provide for a disclosure statement that the development is near an
airport and also that the area may be subject to aircraft overflights.
4. The applicant shall comply with Title 25 of the California Administrative
Code. Compliance will require the preparation of an acoustic study for the
project to assure a day-time interior noise level of not more than 45 dBA
on the CNEL scale.
2.
5. An aviation easement shall be dedicated to the County over the entire
parcel . The easement shall allow aviation access at altitudes above 173
feet Above Mean Sea Level (approximately 155 feet above proposed resi-
dences). Prior to .recordation, the height limitation of the easement shall
be subject to prior review and approval by the County Zoning Administrator
in consultation with ALUC staff and the Manager of Airport.
The following statements are not conditions of approval , however, the applicant
should be aware of these comments prior to filing the Final Subdivision Map or
attempting to secure building permit.
A. The Contra. Costa County Consolidated Fire Protection District. See
attached.
B. The Contra Costa Central Sanitary District. See attached.
BT/aa
6/19/87
7/1/87
RZVI/6958.BT
CO�t R.A CpST9
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CONSOLIDATED FIRE DISTRICT
S!
.2010 GEARY ROAD �''�c DISI aPLEASANT HILL, CA 94523-4694
(415)930-5500
BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION
April 27, 1987
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
P. 0. Box 951
Martinez, CA 94553
Attn: Byron Turner
F
SUBJECT: 3029-87 (RZ 2723, TR 6958)
Pacheco Manor
5380 Pacheco Boulevard
Dear Mr. Turner:
We have reviewed the application to establish a major subdivision at the subject
location. This project is regulated by codes and ordinances administered by
this Fire District relative to Contra Costa County Ordinance 86/71 and the
State Fire Marshal's Regulations. If approved b
gu pp y your office, the following
shall be required:
1. The developer shall provide an adequate and reliable water supply for
fire protection with a minimum fire flow of 1,000 GPM. Required flow
shall be delivered from not more than one hydrant while maintaining
20 pounds residual pressure in the main. (10.301c)UFC
2. The developer shall provide two hydrants of the East Bay type. Location
of hydrants will be determined by this office upon submittal of 3 copies ;
of a tentative map or site plan. (10.301c)UFC
3. Provide access roadways with all-weather driving surfaces of not less
than 28 feet in width, and not less than 13'6" of vertical clearance,
to within 150 feet of travel distance to all portions of the exterior
walls of every building. Access roads shall not exceed 20% grade,
shall have a minimum inside turning radius of 28 feet, and must be
capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus (16 tons) .
When conditions prevent conformance with the above, the Chief may
permit the installation of fire protection systems; provided such
systems are not otherwise required by this or any other code.
(10.207)UFC
4. Access roads and hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to
combustible construction. (10.301d)UFC
H,U 2
�� a
i
C.C.C. Comm. Dev. Dept./Byron Turner
RE: 3029-87/Pacheco Manor
April 27, 1987
Page 2
5. Approved premises identification shall be provided. Such numbers shall
contrast with their background and be readily visible from the street.
(10.208)UFC
6. When traffic signals are installed/modified or when proposed develop-
ment will cause undue traffic congestion, the developer shall provide
a suitable number of traffic signal pre-emption systems (Gpticom) as
approved by the Traffic Engineer and this office.
7. A pro rata fee of 20C per square foot will be assessed to partially
offset initial expenditures for additional necessary fire service
resources.
It is requested that a copy of the conditions of approval for the subject
project be forwarded to this office when compiled by the planning agency.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the
undersigned.
Sincerely,
4eest3r6ll. Nelson
Fire Inspector
CHN:vw
CC: Gordon & Doris Hamblin
D & M Development Co./Thomas Dailey
Contra Costa Water District/LeeAnne Cisterman
File
f
GSoNa