Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01011989 - BOX1 (3) n "rye ,�f >3 Il L S��w.7 f�V �, ' 1l 7 1,4Yh RECEIVED SE P 2 C 1989 Pf+'; BATCHELOR ",,An��C+£-'Supp wiORS p, LJi De ut L�/k(rJI 3 7 , 9 ' -t t ;;o i 1 V V"' fir► ��1 E IVSD SEP 181989 Pi-itt BATCHELOR CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS . f)e ut J. U. NATTKEMPER i 5065 ALHAMBRA VLY Rlr MARTINEZ,CA. 94553 a { i OCT: 2 1989 CLEC,,;^ •f: a C)..`.UPc(;V9;GRS CGP;i,. CC. a C4 1 � ar� _14 po 1�h the RECEIVED52 SEP 2 61989 t IERK!?CiARO OF SU PERVISORS C ?R�COS —jam` 'y Circ 41/'r1 Lcr _ t' lCtt y '/I cat crF / Gu C-> r-.(.,l1lct Y ill e7 RECEIVED SEP 11989 FH1' BATCHELOR CLERK GOARO Of SUVERMORS /} GjNjDk COSTA CO. Qe v fl 12-1 it r i� I ,-'1 carr� .r Yys3`' CIA- 1V M 'iECEIVEDJ,4�� S E P 11989 ZX/ PHIL BATCHELOR CLERK BOARD Of SUPERVfSORS RA COSTA CO. Oe W° o(N'a C/0D p d Ile RECEIVED SEP 11989 PHIL BATCHELOR CLERK BOARD A OF SUPERVISORS TRA COSTACG. D C,r ;1 ° 8oatd A&46�v { CEIVED PHIL B CL!: .K BOARD 9 t Man'. CONTRA E A C et�uly BY ........; TtAA . UbAl q"vv w �t , . /� VAX,-\- � u w b cc. ung cl C,p D p 0 Integrated Resoloes Equity Corporation � RE 1981 N. Broadway, Suite 420 I � IVED Walnut Creek, CA 94596 415-944-4811 (Office) j AUG �9g9 415-757-1503 (Antioch, CA) PHIL BATCHELOR CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS co. Bette A.Johnson CO OSTA � Deputy Registered Representative �ntegmted Rermurcesi 40 /V7 Ills ale I �I 144 Board M;w,mbara CDP County Administrator rata r Health&Dr�lc;4 :Z Cornmunity Development Public Works County Counsel 2. Write Dear Chair Torlakson and Members Of 4the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental impact Report on the General Plan. The Oat,dey Plan and the Bethel, E Island Plan should be evaluated with the county General Plan in one FIR. AUG 1 61989 A G 161 U 989 �!E RNV!�, Sincerely, L ) FK 5C -,)F S U P E T"V!5 R C ST,,%CO. D De 0 De ut ( M o: t - f Supervisors Sincerely Costa County Board of Supervisula� clo Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA q q6&3 ----------- ------------ ------ 2. Write t Dear Chair Torlakson and Members or the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact I Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sierely, Mail To. Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors clo Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street Martinez CA q4 .A- W �le .=. 15 A U G C' t5 i I E E AUG 1 b 1989 C!`RK�O.°.RD OF SUFEkY;�:;•".� C J; TA CO. e �1^ ------------------------------ -2. , -------2. Write I , 1 Dear Chair Torlakson and Melmbers of the Board: 1 1 I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please i incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact jReport on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General t Plan in one EIR. 1 +I Sincerely, 4 t I I III I � Mail To: 1 Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors t j c% Clerk of the Board 6511 Pine Street Vjj4 I Martinez, CA 1 1-------------- ----I; IF I D.Rolens 31 Carolyn Ct. 4 _ Walnut Creek,CA 94596 i `yP Ly LY - Ia�c syyy', L ------ ---- --- p r 14 AUG Yosemit i psi Uoa(-d Aat&rYj C-,D D i i -TVE ! 2. Write ' ! Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: AUG 10 1989 ! t I I support A Vision for A Better Contra uCosta. Please ;a ,.r5n,ZHELaa ! orate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact c�.�K��H D SU�ERv:sORs incorporate t p p COSTA CO. De ut Report on the General Plan. The Oakley�Plan and the Bethel a ............. 41 Island Pian should be evaluated with the'County General �i Plan in one EIR.. i y '! Sincerely, ! ti y # Mail To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors IC/o Clerk of the Board + 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA __—_____--,_—__-------- —___— --- -- i 2. Write ! a ! Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board; I I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please I incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact 1 Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel j Island Plan should be evaluated with.the County General I Plan in"ane EIR. 1 � Sincerely, , fF^RYou UIQR � 1 B � I t-.- I Mail To: P I Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors I clo Clerk of the.Board i i 651 Pine Street t Martinez, CA ___ ,�. ---_-� - - -------- 103 A ss �r�,>. LOW" 4 l :2),D � EIVED AUG 101989 W',BATCHELOR C'ERK 1-20ARD OF SUFERV:.CCR, a CO"'.."CSTA CO. 00/1 Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact . Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerely, inz ,a Mrs. Betty Brown .-,p w 44 Beverly Road Berkeley, California 9470 , 9 AUG usA25� �3 FOR YUUR 9tN4'FUr"R M ATIa E� �' D AUG 101989 p}!!1.oATCHEIOR`';.ORS CLEFK g0 TFD OF T CO. De ut g .......... - - - - - --- I 1 Z. Write I 1 Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. I. I I Sincerely, I � � I 1 Mail To: 1 Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c%Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street v I Martinez, CA I Ms.A.E.Schroeder 706 Seaview Dr ;f �D C _ EI Cerrito CA y 94530 \ ,yi F.�► ! I FUR Y��R INFOMATIOg S.5 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on August 8, 1989 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, McPeak, and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Dissemination of correct information regarding the County General Plan and its Growth Management Element. As recommended by Supervisor McPeak, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the Director of Community Development is DIRECTED to respond to all letters received supporting "A Vision for a Better Contra Costa," and to outline what is in the General Plan, specifically the Growth Management Element. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that information be disseminated to organizations, especially the Sierra Club and the Greenbelt Alliance, who are promoting "A Vision for a Better Contra Costa" and giving out erroneous maps. I hereby certify that this.Is a true and aonect oopy of an actin taken and entered on the minutea of the Board of 1pervisors on the date shown. ATTE611M Q..Z 919 9 PHIL BATCH A.CIO*of the Board of SuWvWm&W Coungr AdmWavator By cc: Community Development County Counsel County Administrator August 4, 1989 Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Cl erk of the Board AUG 81989 651 Pine St. Martinez, CA PH "BATCHELOR CLERK EOARD OF 50PERViSORS TA CO. Dear Chairman: I support A Vision for a Better Contra Costa. I am concerned about the urban sprawl , leveling of our mountain tops, and desecration of our natural areas. Please provide protection for our Greenbelt sections, and what agri- cultural lands exist. Lets grow UP and not OUT. Or better yet, lets not grow at all . Please vote against more malls. With Hilltop and Pinole so close, we certainly do not need another. I support city centered growth patterns accessed by transit systems to cut down on highway travel . Please do what you can to incorporate these as alternatives in the En- vironmental Impact Report on the General Plan. Sincerely, Dorothy Nate 509 Colusa El Cerrito, CA 94530 Co -eys 0,:T 10 Springhill Lane Lafayette, CA 94549 Augus _1 _ 1_QP_Q RECEIVED Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c/o Clerk of the Board AUG 71989 651 Pine Street PHIL BATCHELOR Martinez , CA CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CO a C TA CO. Byev Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support "A Vision for a Better Contra Costa" as proposed by Greenbelt Alliance. Please incorporate it as an alterna- tive in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerely, Elizabeth W. Sullivan Patrick L. Sullivan CG Aug 1 1989 Contra Costa County Board of SupervisorsECE c/o Clerk of the Board R. , . 651 Pine St. Martinez, Ca. 94553 AUG 31989 Fliil.3;JC4E;O? CLERK 30.4.RD OF Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board CONTRA COSTA..o. b I support A VISION FOR A BETTER CONTRA COSTA, the planning measures recommended by the Greenbelt Alliance and other organizations. I think the recent actions of the public to support (with $SSS) purchase of land for Mt. Diablo Park, the passage of Prop. AA (tax $S$) , Martinez residents work to save the Franklin Hills, and many other grass roots actions around the county sends a clear message, we want better planning before it is too late. Please incorporate A VISION FOR A BETTER CONTRA COSTA as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerely W oug Burges 39 Fountainhead Ct. Martinez, Ca. 94553 Cc: 3044d �►1.Gi�rb��s C/DD West Contra Costa Conservation League 1015 Leneve Place, EI Cerrito, CA 94530 Jean Siri, President Barbara Vincent, Vice President Kelly Falconer, Secretary C� Z RECEI F .SIJ i AUG 31989 fF! "vi. AT H C!Fsf'.ti:i:,'tp OF SUPEUPERVt;Cr'.S C�..:?:'.,=.COSTA CO. De ut GDD i 4050 Poplar Avenue Concord, California 94521 August 1, 1980 R ' ' , ED Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County AUS 21989 651 Pine Street PKI.anT:I,FLce Martinez, CA 94553 °CLERK&-)!T^ pE VSCaS ...�.......... Deu Dear Board of Supervisors: We strongly oppose the proposed general plan which will guide land-use in our county for the next 20 years. The general plan contains good policy language calling for protecting agricultural land, but how can you protect agricultrual land without a firm urban limit line? Without the urban limit line, the Greenbelt can be eroded away, piecemeal, through general plan amendments. We support the Greenbelt Alliance' s alternative plan, "A Vision for a Better Contra Costa." This plan would preserve the prime farmlands in Eastern Contra Costa and also protect the ridgelines throughout the County. We urge you to also support "A vision for a Better Contra Costa." Sincerely, Mr. & Xrs. Wm. Sattler 4050 Poplar Ave. cc '�)O&"d &xke6 Concord, CA 94521_ RICHARD CARTER 2365 WARREN ROAD, WALNUT CREEK, CA. 94595 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ' �4,+T c/o CLERK OF THE BOARD, Fi 651 PINE STREET, AUGUST 1, 1989 "CLEERK 21989 MARTINEZ, CA. TCHEi OR OF SUPEnRVISOES STA CO. De u DEAR CHAIR TORLAKSON AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD: I SUPPORT A VISION FOR A BETTER CONTRA. COSTA. PLEASE INCORPORATE IT AS AN ALTERNATIVE IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT ON THE GENERAL PLAN. THE OAKLEY PLAN AND THE BETHEL ISLAND PLAN SHOULD],BE EVALUATED WITH THE COUNTY GENERAL PLAN IN ONE EIR. SINCERELY, I OR Yap JUL121989" «ej ci�eZ f7e ut J ,Cam t f o {o�fia Couv%i-y © 9190 �Co (e v- oQ- +ire goae a 1 Mar+f z , C Dear C Garai r Tor(a ksov, ars d /embers o; 4e 6ogr d Ore-e-r-lpijr s 'Tvvm -9av, r-coviclsco y 1 be ll'eve f f pro Jeml- 1oth 4 �As,e Vvwc3styres are alop+tj by ovI-e GOL4v)+Y> QAAer e.o..ol+i2S + jets - - crit iv, fio s+ep, -T�- hod, vJCII -4Mat foes , ho+ d we I1 fov- +ke Q�y mea %im, Alk CCwm +ies Olre ac)kly�ec.+ed a�l +Ws ' s�► h, cN2 've1k,;05 ©,A ' rA c i151P).9> caod opeh space, T k i s I5 WA/ V4, W rO la .�. hope your vu//I s c p pov`� Vi SldV' dor p 8 ter C t�- Cc9 t , PjeC'Se jv� corp©V�'�2 Ii- q5 q� �t terha+ive %n -Gte- v� �IYav�n�2v� o7/ ,gymacf AePQr+ eti °fide Gemerar ! Plam,. A lsoj alae Oak1e PIao c4tnJ +ke l3e+hel Tslond P101 9- AoL4/J &e Viewed wf-�4 +ke Cati+l iy 6emle"l P(a.l i h one 15:xR. As reporl-,ed jo -c-ke pofers 111r, - orfcaksov? cis G k ari rmah Yo%Ar 't`�em e was �-� 1<ee� �w tY`c? Cosfv r3 eo vt t[f f/ d v o u t j work t p" t-ec-f- a c5r awl c u 1 lira re, 5tApp0e-.k eye oats ky�K art,cere lY cc : i I I' July 10 , 1989 Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board = I support A VISION FOR A BETTER CONTRA COSTA.Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan . The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan. in one EIR. r 1 lie.uL F Sincerely, L J U L 1 11989 Ted Hamilton GDD J U L 2 11989 j. Ike G/ l coo . � �� . MARTI WATTERMAN 2029 Durant Avenue Berkeley, CA 94704 EomYl` • Contra • Harvey E. Bragdon unity Director of Community Development Development Costa Department I ' } County Administration Building County 651 Pine Street 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553-0095 Phone: 646-2035 CRIED July 5, 1989 JUL 1989 FHII BATCHELOR CLERK.'GUARD OF SUPEP.VISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. Mr. Wesley Clark PI ............. ..511.............. Dn of 2040 Shoreline Loop #243 San Ramon, CA 94583 Dear Mr. Clark: Our department has been requested to reply to your letter of June 14, 1989 to Supervisor Torlakson. The County is undergoing a review of it's General Plan. As part of the process we are preparing an Environmental Impact Report to evaluate the impact of the development decisions contained in the plan, as well as alternatives to that development pattern. Your name is being placed on a mailing list of persons who have requested notice of the availability of documents, or the conduct of hearings on this project. A copy of your letter will be forwarded to the County Planning Commission for their consideration in the development of the General Plan. I am enclosing a copy of the first page of the draft Growth Management Element with a line drawn next to the proposed language most closely related to your inquiry. Although not relinquishing decision making authority to the cities, the joint decision making proposed would make the city and county partners in the future development of an area. Copies of the Draft General Plan are available from this office for $25.00 in person, or $28.50 with postage and handling. If I can be of further assistance, please call . Sincerely yours, Dennis M. Barry General Plan Review Program Manager cc: Clerk of the Board �,W Contra Costa County 'lV Growth Management Element " ��N� ^ - Planning Commission ����ing Oraft General Plan March, 1989 CHAPTER IV GROWTH MANAGEMENT ELEMENT Introduction This growth management program for Contra Costa County, included in the General Plan as a separate element, is primarily intended to implement the General Plan goal of providing for the public health, safety and welfare of its residents by preserving "quality of life"' For purposes of this program, "quality of life" is defined as a given level of public amenity, service and facility capacity that is to be maintained for existing developments as well as provided for future development. Performance objectives included in this growth management program address these minimum infrastructure and service standards which must be met in order for growth to proceed' Land may not be eligible for development, even if it is properly designated and zoned, unless the performance standards of key controlling factors can be met' This h management program is intended requirements set forth in Measure C, the Contra Costa County Transportation Improvement and Growth Management Program, passed by the voters in November, 1988. The measure consists of two main components. First, it establishes a / retail alleviate major existing regional transportation problems, with a portion of the funds to be returned to local jurisdictions. Second, the measure requires local jurisdictions to adopt growth management programs that ensure future residential and commercial growth pays for the infrastructure that is required to serve the development. The return of local discretionary funds to each jurisdiction is contingent upon adoption of a growth management program. In order to successfully implement this program, Contra Costa must establish a new city-Cqunty growth management decision-making process. Such a process of inter'urisdictional decision-making is not in existence anywhere else in the State; the establishment of one in Contra Costa County will be a pioneering effort. Under this joint decision-making process, the County should negotiate agreements with the cities to prevent development from occurring within each of the city Spheres of Influence unless several items have been adopted: a city-County growth management plan with performance standards; a city Housing Element which provides for an appropriate jobs/housing balance for the sub-region; and a ! growth metering process and procedure for the region' � In order to implement the growth management program, five specific elements or technical tasks must he carried out. A flow chart illustrating the sequence of these tasks is included as Figure IV-1. The tasks are: /l\ a land supply and development monitoring process; ` 105. 1 : CONTRA COSTA COUN'T'Y Clerk of the Board TO: Director of Community Development DATE: June 19, 1989 PFMM: Jeanne 0. Maglio/cf SUBJECT: Letter from W. Clark ----- ------- In accordance with established Board policy, the attached communication is being referred to your department for disposition. If no Board action is required, please furnish this office with a copy of your response by July 18, 1989 This will enable us to close our file on this correspondence. In the event action is required by the Board, please submit your report and recommendation to the County Aministrator for listing on the Board's agenda. Attachment CC: W. Clark County Administrator Wesley Clark 2040 Shoreline Loop, #243 San Ramon, CA 94583 RECEIVED Dear Mr . Torlakson, June 14,1898 I am writing to express my concern over the housing development that is plannedin the Dougherty Valley and outside Danville and San Ramon. The residents of San Ramon, Dublin and Danville are not excited about further developement for some very good reasons. The most important being the destruction of the surrounding environment. Please let the cities decide what to do around their borders, not the developers or the county I appreciate your response and concern. Sincerely, A��/�� Wesley Clark Board MOMbelr$ (ptOVIded) . ..f, Harvey E. Bragdon Community Contra director of Community Development 'Development Costa Department County County Administration Building 651 Pine Street 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553.0095 f f, Phone: 646-2035 June 15, 1989 Mr. Jim Boman 2641 San Carlos Drive Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Dear Mr. Boman: Thank you for your letter concerning the Draft County General Plan. Your comments will be forwarded to the County Planning Commission for consideration during the hearings on the Draft. Your name and address are being added to the mailing list for notices of hearings on the Draft Environmental Impact Report as well as the Draft County General Plan. Sincerely yours, Dennis M. Barry, AICP General Plan Review Program Manager cc: Clerk of the Board s ��- I3 ► a k .. ... J u N-5 1989 N.;1 SATCHEiOR Ct2 ?C U' ,u"ERVtSORS C.CX O la CO. D Co.... De rd i{w M CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Clerk of the Board TO: Director of Community Development DATE: June 9, 1989 M M: Jeanne 0. Maglio SUBJECT: Letter from J. Boman In accordance with established Board policy, the attached communication is being referred to your department for disposition. If no Board action is required, please furnish this office with a copy of your response by July s, 1989 This will enable us to close our file on this correspondence. In the event action is required by the Board, please submit your report and recommendation to the County Aministrator for listing on the Board's agenda. Attachment CC: J. Boman County Administrator From the desk of. . . Jim Boman Regional Industrial Engineering 1950 Franklin, Oakland, CA 94612 /(415) 987-3396 � UN/1 C. Iti�C�PrG� h e-""f 6"44 yf 41 ¢d! �►�,„� t-�� Cos�q �C � rrr ri /fi� / 7 7je � �- / fes , r7e oma . t 70 l 1llQ � ��dl rk-4 )Olgn /Al 'gee ' C5710 ce1-e RECEIVED J U N 9 1989 if PHIL WCHELOR CLERK COARD OF SUPERVISORS COINTV,COSTA CO. iC ........... ..,. i I JAWS E. 901AAW ` 2641 SAN CARLOS M WA0W CREEK, CA. 19 10011411 j I<AJSen PERM NENTc i I I Mu' - t m fi O � � a e, p rIA Ir 9�6 x - a � lJ�ctr C fig il�^+GH T-6rL c! u w vfgu/y<� • ac-w, cof--c-e-fo L74-41 hC_ 44�&} -' vW � Jn. Cph" l•c �lJ���• C .ovh 1 �� ile4.cxl��d 6o,4tenvle- ll4.d14'.. ,,Q: GtcW�CL TS •lPrC..d/.I'j t� ��� S S✓��o/fi 6 Vl- T" Ar &4cf'`C.6A lt ft_ Cos—$cE. mo � 5�0L>bd VTleitM.C.- v,\- pu T?' oe\,41,..i�^' p•ecoi:t,l plll�v\. �.a I . .AVE JUN 1 41989 PHL DAiCHELORPEk CLERK DOARD OF SUJ;$pgS aK.vt J\c l rv�Un,a Cr p C COSTA CCS. -.De ut �Lf 03 ccs Gam ` t r a �• 1 Xi d 2. Write Dear Chair Toriakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerel y Mail To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors clo Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA cc ------------------------ ------L nQ ` `_00 G -00 �• �3 ` It � G�U CD �M1 ti r it a i 4. a earChairTorlakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerel y Cw-6ocdmctc�— ZW3�1"Zs 1 Mail To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Geak,to clo Clerk of the Board 1 651 Pine Street 4artinez, CA W � p 9 W CPU n 75> w 0{ o, N ----------------------- 2. Write Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerely, Mail To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors clo Clerk of the Board M1 Pine Street Wartinez, CA ccd C-DD ® . � \� : P { . . �� Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support A.Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General ' Plan in one EIR. Sincerely, Mail To: Costa County Board of Supervisors Clerk of the Board *tra Pine Street Martinez, CA ('L' N � O - N r' n O o N cl ' s l t-�) CD @ o o m tt r3 O ti a w °os Z15 y m� CPr1 dG � � � ��M � .� �N5• e n � _ c y ANNE L. MCGREW 5519 TERRA GRANADA DRIVEL' a WALNUT CREEK, CA. 94595 -2/ /9'F7 �aj, et, r �� \ \ \ \\ \ � ) \ \ \ K / i � � { 2 ) \ \ \ ® / % \ �\ . � \ \ � � , �t: ` � � \ »w\ :� : \ 2 �* � % � ` � ( ii \ } \ \ � \ � \\� � � �� . z�E 5�& �� � f\ fa � 3} � �G � � f �� - � �} , %/��a , �� �% _ . , ���� � � � � . � � . � V � RECEINIEDYo�&Z� e14-JUN 1 61989 PHS R CLERK BOARD Of SUPERVISORS O. ��`�'�'/// C/ IX; f"'Y C NTRA C TAC `��'�(� I '777��'"��'�YY Deputy Ile ox A � r • C� • • DOUGLAS REAL ESTATE & INVESTMENTS 7140 Buckingham Blvd. Berkeley, CA 94705 p� R� T �~ is f�;E i June 19 , 1989 JUN 2, 1 1989 Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c/o Clerk of the Board cY oe 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 re: EIR on General Plan Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the EIR on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sincerely, Michael E. Douglas MD:mac CC: Gtr 1 RECEIVED JUN 12 1989 PHft BATCHELOR ( � CLERK GOARD OF SUPERViSOGS CON STA CO. 8 De ut Alt, . , 47- _ l 6 fir a a !'1 ,n ci.. rn . A 1 l� � 4494 Camstock Court Concord, CA 94521 June 14, 1989 .. � I. l .� ' JUN 1 41989 rN t ggiCrF.l 2 n 5 raK CO ?�OF ' ACV�•R 0, De C Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c/o Clerk of the Board 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support a Vision of a Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. We are deeply concerned about how development is mushrooming out of hand in this county. We DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN ANOTHER LOS ANGELES COUNTY OR ORANGE COUNTY. Now is our chance to make things better than in Southern California. This can be done by slow and careful planning. Let's save our hillsides, our wetlands, the rich farmlands in west county--these resources are too precious to lose forever! Sincerely, ct Dick & Anne Edwards KATHRYN STEIN 32 Beverly Rd. Kensington, CA 94707 [JUN E ° IrRIL June 10 , 1989 1 441989 H;I BA.CHE!ORARD OF SUPERVISORS COut Chair Torlakson CONTRA COSTA COUNTYR BOARD OF SUPERVISORS c/o Clerk of the Board 651 Pine STreet Martinez , CA RE: A VISION FOR ABETTER CONTRA COSTA Dear Chair Torlakson : I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR.11 jta"' Si ryn St n CC G � � M v� Af RECEIVED JUN 13 1989 m;,,BATCHELOR 4 C1EEK SOARD OF SUPERVISCGS CO•rt'2A COSTA CO. RECEIVED IJ U N 12 1989 1' Pf4ft BATCHELOR CLERK GOARD Of SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. lab", q� az —ewu '12 . cc : C D Cn L p� 1 I -----------------------------— 2. Write I Dear Chair Torlakson and Members of the Board: I support A Vision for A Better Contra Costa. Please incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General' Plan in one EIR. Sincerely, Mail To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors clo Clerk of the Board Sophie Fordon 651 Pine Street 14 Janet Way#148 Martinez, CA Tiburon, CA 94920 —————————————————— MS.SOPHIE FORDON aA Y 14 JANET WAY#148 1-1y�C�v TuIURON,CA.94920 Q,' P M (P 0 26 5 JUN /9813 0) r P20M - 5 13 cc JUN /2 8S CA% CC-. boa Olaftktzs ' �,�;,,r �1n a�Y -1"o v�,a�c.�ri k Muw.1�x's� �� �•t3 oar• �1�. o rT ;___ s i 4 Yt- 04-1 C-00 w1ok, V,,v I Y-ova i OJ tQ-V Y'\ - `VIKr *✓��� `�..�- ov a(} -mss-1a� �la�. s-4.�.���►.l avl G�v� 6�' �} e_�J A-� b oOlL ! /t2e/XZ" _. IC4-)D---- _._ �,........... DIANNE K SEABDRG '~' 1164 GLEN RD S. LAFAYETTE CA 94649 - America the Beautiful USA 15 Co v\�v a ca t& Ca" a .4 So ',^C) O� Sk V Is�Y's MORRISON & FOERSTER SAN FRANCISCO NEW YORK LOS ANGELES LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW WASHQVGTON,D.C. ORANGECOUNTY LONDON WALNUT CREEK HONG KONG PALO ALTO BRIEFING TOKYO DENVER EPA ISSUES POLICY REGARDING SETTLEMENT OF SUPERFUND LIABILITY FOR LANDOWNERS On June 6 EPA issued its long-awaited Under the new guidance, EPA will guidance announcing the criteria it will use consider settling its claims against such under Superfund regarding settlements owners of property before an enforcement and covenants not to sue owners of action is brought,based upon the contaminated property. The Agency broke probability that the defense is available. new ground by announcing it would also, The guidance requires landowners to in certain cases,provide releases from provide the following information: (1) Superfund liability to prospective buyers of steps taken to determine previous contaminated property. Although many ownership and use; (2) the condition of the issues of interest to real estate owners are property at time of purchase; (3) still unresolved,these settlement criteria representations made at the time of sale; (4) could facilitate certain transactions which price and market value of the property; (5) before were plagued by the uncertainty of any specialized knowledge on the part of unending potential liability for cleanup the purchaser; and (6) evidence of due care costs. with respect to the release of hazardous substances discovered after purchase. Under CERCLA, the federal Superfund These information items will be evaluated statute, current owners of contaminated based on conventional practices in place at property (and lenders foreclosing on it) are the time of sale. If based on this evaluation strictly liable for all cleanup costs unless EPA concludes that the property owner one of a few extremely limited defenses can would be likely to prevail in asserting the be asserted. Liability for cleanup attaches defense, EPA will agree not to sue, even if the contamination resulted from the provided that the landowner guarantees acts of previous owners or occupants. access to the property and,in some cases, Limited defenses are available to property makes a cash payment for a percentage of owners and lenders who can show that, cleanup costs. after appropriate inquiry and evaluation, they acquired the property without actual For prospective purchasers,EPA will or constructive knowledge of the consider providing a covenant not to sue environmental problems. The defendant under CERCLA if the following criteria are bears the burden of proof on these issues. met: (1) the facility is one at which Thus,until now the owner had to await enforcement action is likely; (2) EPA will EPA enforcement actions and hope then to realize a "substantial monetary benefit"; (3) be able to prove it was an "innocent continued operation or development of the purchaser." facility will not result in environmental JULY 1989 NO.4 MORRISON & FOERSTER SAN FRANCISCO NEW YORK LOS ANGELES LAND USE AND ENVIRONMENTAL LAW WASHINGTON,D.C. ORANGECOUNTY LONDON WALNUT CREEK HONG KONG PALO ALTO BRIEFING TOKYO DENVER EPA ISSUES POLICY REGARDING SETTLEMENT OF SUPERFUND LIABILITY FOR LANDOWNERS On June 6 EPA issued its long-awaited Under the new guidance, EPA will guidance announcing the criteria it will use consider settling its claims against such under Superfund regarding settlements owners of property before an enforcement and covenants not to sue owners of action is brought,based upon the contaminated property. The Agency broke probability that the defense is available. new ground by announcing it would also, The guidance requires landowners to in certain cases,provide releases from provide the following information: (1) Superfund liability to prospective buyers of steps taken to determine previous contaminated property. Although many ownership and use; (2) the condition of the issues of interest to real estate owners are property at time of purchase; (3) still unresolved,these settlement criteria representations made at the time of sale; (4) could facilitate certain transactions which price and market value of the property; (5) before were plagued by the uncertainty of any specialized knowledge on the part of unending potential liability for cleanup the purchaser; and (6) evidence of due care costs. with respect to the release of hazardous substances discovered after purchase. Under CERCLA, the federal Superfund These information items will be evaluated statute, current owners of contaminated based on conventional practices in place at property (and lenders foreclosing on it) are the time of sale. If based on this evaluation strictly liable for all cleanup costs unless EPA concludes that the property owner one of a few extremely limited defenses can would be likely to prevail in asserting the be asserted. Liability for cleanup attaches defense, EPA will agree not to sue, even if the contamination resulted from the provided that the landowner guarantees acts of previous owners or occupants. access to the property and,in some cases, Limited defenses are available to property makes a cash payment for a percentage of owners and lenders who can show that, cleanup costs. after appropriate inquiry and evaluation, they acquired the property without actual For prospective purchasers, EPA will or constructive knowledge of the consider providing a covenant not to sue environmental problems. The defendant under CERCLA if the following criteria are bears the burden of proof on these issues. met: (1) the facility is one at which Thus, until now the owner had to await enforcement action is likely; (2) EPA will EPA enforcement actions and hope then to realize a "substantial monetary benefit"; (3) be able to prove it was an "innocent continued operation or development of the purchaser." facility will not result in environmental JULY 1989 NO.4 L�naA �� u�n��noun 1230 TULANE DRIVE WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596 M5) 946-0899 June 27, 1989 CP VE Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors c/o Clerk of the Board JUN 2 81989 x651 Pine Street CA '+ srrct z CLERK roARt3 OF St'Pip`,5_Rs Martinez Ir^:CGs7A CU. Dear Chair Toriakson and Members of the Board: De I support "A Vision for a Better Contra Costa:" I urge you to incorporate it as an alternative in the Environmental Impact Report on the General Plan. The Oakley Plan and the Bethel Island Plan should be evaluated with the County General Plan in one EIR. Sin erely, Linda M. Waldroup C)j)