HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11101987 - T.5 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA T.5
Adopted this Order on November 10, 1987 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson and McPeak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
r'
SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeal By Tam Investment Co. , Inc. From
Planning Commission Decision on Development Plan 3053,-"87
and Subdivision 7008 In The Walnut Creek Area. .
The Board on November 3, 1987 continued to November 10,
1987 at 10:30 a.m. the hearing on the appeal of Tam Investment Co. ,
Inc. (owner) from the decision of the Contra Costa County Planning
Commission approving Final Development Plan No. 3053-87 and '+,
Subdivision 7008 with conditions, including a reduction in th`o
number of units and restrictions on building heights and locations
in the Walnut Creek area; and
Karl Wandry, Community Development Department, presented a
brief history of the appeal, described the property site and the
project, commented on the Planning Commission recommendation for 95
units, the conditions being appealed, the 'staff recomme dation, and
the new plan presented by the developer.
The public hearing was opened and the following peop�e
appeared to speak:
Wilbur Duberstein, . P.O. Box 574, San Ramon, representing
the owner/appellant, commented on the project and on issues
including the reduction in size of the developable property, the
widening of Olympic Boulevard, the two phases of the development,
additional conditions that had been imposed on the development, an
84 inch culvert required to control flooding on Tice Valley
Boulevard and divert water to Las Trampas Creek, the increased cost
of improvements to the developer, the cleaning and widening of Las
Trampas Channel, working with Cal Trans and Public Works on the
widening of Olympic Boulevard, the number of units granted, parking,
the number of bedroom in the units, meeting with the neighbors
regarding their concerns, and he requested 105 units to make the
project feasible, and keeping the old conditions of approval;
The following people appeared to speak:
Richard Chaddock, 444 'Bridge Road, Walnut Creek, commented
on concerns including setbacks, the project being nothing but con-
cessions, the number of bedrooms in both phases, loss of land to the
creek, the right of way, the number of units, the parking ratio, and
a shortage of parking spaces;
Gary Ford, 454 Bridge Street, Walnut Creek, expressed con-
cerns including the number of units being requested and the property
being crowded;
Donna Clark, 1470 Dewing Lane, Walnut Creek, expressed
concerns including the view of the project from her home, the impact
of the project, increased density, traffic and noise, and requested
the Board to uphold the Planning Commission decision and deny the
appeal, and extend the proposed laticework across the back of the
. garage to lessen the visual impact;
- 1 -
`4L�a •V
Jeannie Harmon, 16 Acorn Court, Walnut Creek, read a pre-
pared statement by Karen Basker, resident of 1461 Dewing Lane who
could not be present today but lives directly across the creek from
the project, requesting mature landscaping, that a landscape
designer work with Flood Control and the neighbors to design
landscaping to keep lights out of the neighbors windows at night and
offer a pleasant view during the day;
Supervisor Schroder read comments from the following
people who submitted cards but did not wish to speak:
C.S. Rogers, 33 Acorn Court, Walnut Creek;
Marion Peters, 17 Acorn Court, Walnut Creek;
Sylvia DeWard, 53 Acorn Court, Walnut Creek; -
Wilbur Duberstein spoke in rebuttal on issues including
the auto headlight problem, height of buildings, setbacks and the
number of units.
Jens Hansen, 424 2nd Street, Oakland, Hansen, Murakami ,
Eshima, Inc. , applicant, commented on setbacks, the number of
bedrooms in the project and the headlight problem.
The public hearing was closed.
Supervisor Schroder commented that he would like to
clarify issues including alleged changes of requirements for appro-
val by Public Works and Cal Trans and the alleged increased costs to
the developer, the parking requirements relative to the change in
the number of units and concerns raised by the community.
Supervisor Schroder moved to defer decision on the matter
to the next meeting on the determination calendar.
Supervisor Torlakson requested a clarification from
Community Development Department on the number of units approved and
on the neighbors' concerns on the landscaping and visual impact.
Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the decision on
the appeal by Tam Investments, Inc. from the Planning Commission
decision on Development Plan 3053-87 and Subdivision 7008 in the
Walnut Creek area is DEFERRED to the December 1 , 1987 determination
calendar.
I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy.of
an action taken and entered on;leis minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: _1(k2d4-0-L,&_ 1oj lqR7
Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board PHIL BAT& E:_OR, clockof the Board
cc: Community Development Department of Supervisors and County Administrator
County Counsel
County Administrator b
By . Deputy
2 -