HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12051989 - 1.12 ,/� 12
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on December 5, 1989 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, McPeak & Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Authorizing Acceptance of Instrument.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the following
instrument is hereby ACCEPTED:
INSTRUMENT REFERENCE GRANTOR AREA
Grant MS 4-89 David and Danville
Deed Rebecca Ritchie
of
Development
Rights
I hereby certify that this is a vue and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED -nF r 19 g 9
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board
Of&4WWIora and County Administrator
Originator: Public Works (ES)
cc: Recorder (via Title Co) then PW Records thn Clerk of Board
Director of Community Development
BO:5.t12
1. 12A
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on December 5, 1989 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, and Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Appeal of Public Works Department re MS 4-89
The Board had before it on its agenda this day item 1. 12,
the acceptance of a grant deed of development rights from grantors
David and Rebecca Ritchie in exchange for the deferral of the collect
and convey requirements for subdivision MS 4-89 being developed in the
Danville area, as well as approval for the parcel map for said
subdivision.
The Public Works Director filed with this Board a memorandum
dated December 5, 1989 appealing the approval of the grant deed of
development rights, stating that he believed that the deferral of the
collect and convey requirement is not consistent with the previously
expressed desires of the Board of Supervisors and is, therefore, not
warranted. He stated that Ordinance 88-45 approved by the Board on
May 24, 1988 provided for the deferral of collect and convey
requirements in exchange for a deed of development rights granted to
the County when the findings specified in Section 92-6. 002 of the
County Ordinance Code can be made, and that he was of the opinion that
the Board intended for this deferral to be granted only when a
substantial hardship exists, and that he believed that the applicant' s
letter requesting deferral fails to demonstrate the existence of a
substantial hardship.
Supervisor Schroder explained the position of the applicant
and noted that the Community Development Department had recommended
the issuing of the grant deed of development rights, that he had met
with the owner and his representative and Mr. Murphy and Mr. Walford
from the Public Works Department, and that although he appreciated the
difficulty of the County accepting the deferment of improvements, the
improvements would be put in at a later date when the property is
developed, and therefore he would recommend denying the appeal of the
Public Works Director.
As recommended by Supervisor Schroder, IT IS BY THE BOARD
ORDERED that the aforesaid Appeal of the Public Works Director is
DENIED.
,hereby certify that this is a tris and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supmi an sh
ATTESTED: _ r,�► , __s'. r f 9
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the�eoat!
p/8upavIsors sed County Administrator _
cc: Public Works Director Deputy
Community Development By —'