HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01171989 - T.5 ,. .amu;
T. 5
1 aOARD OF SUPERVISORS
/� arvey E. Bral don Contra
/ Director of Community Development
Costaay �'
DATE: December 27, 1988 C
SUBJECT: Hearing on Rezoning Application #2816-RZ, to rezone approximately 325
acres of land located at #3641 and #3977 Camino Tassajara,
approximately one quarter mile east of Blackhawk Road, in the DapvillE
area, from Agricultural Preserve (A-4 ) to Planned Unit District (P-1 ) ,
filed by Braddock and Logan Associates (Applicant) and Gerald
Bettencourt (owner) .
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Certify use of the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment
Environmental Impact Report as adequate for purposes of
satisfying the California Environmental Quality Act findings
in accordiwith attached Resolution No. 76-1988 adopted by the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission.
2. Approve Rezoning Application #2816-RZ, from A-4 to P-1 with
conditions as recommended by the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission along with Final Development Plan 3034-88
and Tentative Subdivision #7188.
3. Adopt thelfindings of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission as set forth in its Resolution No. 76-1988 as the
determinations for these actions.
4. Introduce the ordinance giving effect to the rezoning, waive
reading and set date for adoption of same.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The subject p loject was reviewed by the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission on November 2, November 16, and Decemb ,
1988. The Commission is recommending as number of chan t
site plan requested by the Town of Danville.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNA
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDA OFC)M IITTEE
APPROVE OTHER 7
SIGNATURE(S) : ,
ACTION OF BOARD ON I January 17, 1989 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER x
I
I
This being the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors for hearing on the above matter, Harvey Bragdon,
Director of Community Development, presented the staff report on the
request before the Board. He commented on a letter that was sent to
the Board by; the applicant dated January 11, 1989, requesting that
three conditions be modified, and he commented that staff was
.recommending that the modifications be granted.
Supervisor Schroder requested clarification on the condition
relative to noticing.
Mr. Bralgdon clarified the condition on notification, suggesting
that the condition be modified to include that owners of property
within 300 feet of the exterior boundary be notified plus all the
homeowners , associations in the area.
Supervisor Schroder suggested that that would satisfy the spirit
of the Planning Commission' s recommendation of notice to owners of
property within a one mile radius.
The public hearing was opened and the following persons appeared
to speak:
'c
i
Joe Raphael, Braddock and Logan, P.O. Box 3137, San Leandro,
commented on the history of the project before the Board and thanked
Supervisor Schroder, County staff, and the staff of the Town of
Danville for thelir efforts on the plan now before the Board. Mr.
Raphael agreed with Mr. Bragdon' s suggestion for the condition
relative to notification and commented on the other requested
modifications of conditions. He expressed satisfaction with the
outcome of the proposal.
Paul Speroni, 245 Joseph Lane, Contra Costa, thanked the
developer for a tour of the site and the explanation of the project.
He commented onithe request for a focused Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) pertaining to traffic problems and the reasons for such a
request. He commented on issues including traffic in the area and the
density of the project. He suggested the Board take a leadership role
in reducing density. He inquired as to the compatibility of the
project with the adjacent ranchettes, and the need for a regional
planning committee rather than approving project after project.
Supervisor Schroder advised the Board and Mr. Speroni that the
City of Livermore, Pleasanton, Dublin, San Ramon, the Town of
Danville, Alameda County and Contra Costa County have been meeting in
a tri-valley forum relative to the study of the circulation system in
the tri-valley area related to development and general plans.
Jim Blickenstaff, 2311 Crow Canyon Place, San Ramon, representing
Tassajara Now and Tomorrow (TNT) , spoke in opposition to approval of
the project and commented on issues including traffic, the number of
proposed units impacts of the project on the Town of Danville,
degradation ofithe scenic quality of the area, sliding in the area,
and he suggested sending a signal to the Planning Commission and the
citizens of the County that the Board is looking for a new direction
with developments and a little more of the sensitivity to the concerns
of the citizens in the local community as well as in the County.
Joe Raphael spoke in rebuttal on issues including the number of
the proposed units, scenic hills and sliding in the area.
The public hearing was closed. -
Supervis Ir Schroder thanked the staff, Mr. Jensen and Mr. Raphael
for their cooperation in working on this project with the Town of
Danville. Helspoke on the amount of regional mitigation fees as well
as the on-site improvements. He commented on his understanding that
the Town of Danville was satisfied with the final determination of
what should take place on this parcel of property. Supervisor
Schroder moved approval of the rezoning, the final development plan,
and the tentative subdivision map as recommended by the staff.
Su ervis'or McPeak commented on
Supervisor the motion that the
recommendations and approaches advocated by TNT are ones that were
taken into account here and were intended to be expanded upon
throughout the County. She commented on the long history of joint
planning in which the Board has addressed the kinds of issues that
were raised by TNT.
i
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that recommendations 1, 2 with amended
conditions, and 3 are APPROVED; and as to recommendation 4, Ordinance
No. 89-8, giving effect to the rezoning, is INTRODUCED, reading
waived, and January 24, 1989 is set for adoption of same.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS.
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
_ x UNANIP10US (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: I NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: I ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
County Counsel; SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
San Ramon Valley Fire Prot. Dist.
cc: Community Development Dept. ATTESTED January 17 , 1989
Braddock & Logan PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Blackhawk Corporation THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS_
Town of Danville AN COUNTY MINISTRATOR
Thiessen, Gagen & McCoy
Public Works Dept. (2) - Tom Dudziak BYtam ° DEPUTY
t
RESOLUTION NO. 76-1988
RESOLUTION OF TBE SAN RAMON VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE OOUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA CERTIFYING THE
RESPONSES TO COkMENTS ON TBE NOTICE OF INTENT TO USE THE PRIOR EIR
(CAMINO TASSAJARA GPA) AS THE EIR FOR THE BETPF.NCOURT RANCE PROJECT
AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF SAID PROJECT INCLUDING REZONING
2816-RZ, FINAL DEVELOPMENT #3034-88 AND VESTING TENTATIVE MAP FOR
SUBDIVISION NO. 7188
WHEREAS, on August 2 , 1988 , the County of Contra Costa, Board
of Supervisorslcertified a Final EIR for the Camino Tassajara
General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, applications for approval of a development project
known as Bettencourt Ranch, located at Nos. 3641 and 3977 Camino
Tassajara, approximately one-quarter mile east of Blackhawk Road,
in the Danville area, have been submitted' to the Contra Costa
County Community Development Department; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA
Guidelines, an initial study was prepared for the following
applications for Bettencourt Ranch:
I. Rezoning 2816-RZ;
2. Final Development Plan No. 3034-88;
3. Tentative Subdivision Map No. 7188 ; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the initial study, staff concluded
that the previously certified Camino Tassajara General Plan
Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report adequately describes
the general environmental setting of the Bettencourt Ranch Project,
and significant environmental impacts of the Project and
alternatives and mitigation measures related to each significant
effect; and staff recommended, pursuant to Section 15153 (b) of the
State and County CEQA Guidelines, the use of the August, 1988
Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact
Report as the +EIR for the Bettencourt Ranch Project;
WHEREAS, ,'a Notice of Intent to Use a Previously Certified EIR
as EIR for later project was published in accordance with State and
County CEQA Guidelines, taking into account the recent preparation
and drafting of the Final EIR which was approved after extensive
Page 2 Resolution No. 76-1988
public review and comment, pursuant to which notice, written
comments were solicited and accepted until October 28, 1988; and
WHEREAS, al Notice of Application for the Project and Request
for Written Comments was sent to all public agencies having
jurisdiction by law and other interested agencies, organizations
and individuals, which comments were solicited and accepted until
October 28, 1988; and
WHEREAS, prior to November 2, 1988 , the Community Development
Department provided to members of the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commislsion the following: copies of written comments
received by the Community Development Department; lists of persons,
organizations and public agencies commenting on the Notice of
Intent; and any written responses of the Community Development
Department to comments received on the Notice of Intent; and
WHEREAS, the EIR, Notice of Intent, comments and responses to
comments have been reviewed and considered by the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, after notice thereof having been lawfully given, a
public hearing on the proposed Bettencourt Ranch Project,
(consisting of application for Rezoning No. 2816-RZ, Final
Development Plan No. 3034-88 and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
No. 7118 ) was initially scheduled and held on November 2, 1988 and
subsequently rescheduled to and held on November 16, 1988 and
December 7, 1988, at which times a public hearing was conducted,
where all persons therein might appear and be heard, and following
which the Commission closed the hearing for decision; and
WHEREAS, +the developer, County Staff and Town of Danville
Staff met and resolved most of the .concerns raised by the Town of
Danville; and
WHEREAS, the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
reviewed and considered all materials made available to the
Commission as set forth above and otherwise, and all oral and
written comments with respect to certification of the previously
certified FEIR! and all responses thereto, and all oral and written
testimony andexhibits regarding the Bettencourt Ranch Project
itself.
NOW, THEREFORE, the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission resolves, finds, certifies and orders as follows:
1. The Final EIR for the Camino Tassajara General Plan
Amendment, Notice of Intent, and responses to comments constitute
the Final EIR for the Bettencourt Ranch Project, consisting of the
Rezoning, Final Development Plan and Vesting Tentative Subdivision
Map; further, the Final EIR is adequate and has been prepared and
c
Page 3 Resolution No. 76-1988
processed in compliance with CEQA and the State and County CEQA
Guidelines.
2. There is no substantial change proposed in the Bettencourt
Ranch Project compared to the concept plan described in and since
the Final EIR for the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment was
certified, nor has there occurred any substantial changes with
respect to the circumstances under which the Project is being
undertaken, nor is there any new information or material to
consider.
3. Changes in the project, if any, are not substantial, do
not require that a revised EIR be prepared, and, furthermore,
changes, if any, go toward minimizing the environmental impacts and
toward compliance with the General Plan.
4. The San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission hereby
adopts as its environmental findings with respect to the
Bettencourt Ranch Project, consisting of the rezoning, final
development plan and vesting tentative subdivision. map, the
findings set forth in the Board of Supervisors Order dated August
9, 1988, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and
fully incorporated herein by reference, wherein the Board adopted
environmental and other findings with respect to the Camino
Tassajara General Plan Amendment. The findings are equally
applicable to the Bettencourt Ranch Project as herein described.
Environmental impacts have been further mitigated, in part, by the
design of the Project and its Conditions of Approval (attached
hereto as Exhibit "B" and fully incorporated herein by reference)
as follows:
(a) Open Space/Visual Impact. The design of the
Project (including but not limited to the grading plan, lot and
setback criteria, architectural review and requirements, the
Revised Conceptual Landscape Plan, development criteria for the
northeast road and visual enhancements for the detention basin)
further mitigates the loss of open space and any visual impacts of
the Project, all as referenced and required in the Conditions of
Approval.
(b) Drainage Facilities. The drainage detention
basin, with riparian and visual enhancements, is to be developed in
the southeast corner of the Project as identified on the Final
Development Plan. Pursuant to Condition of Approval No. 38 .E. , the
developer is to comply with the drainage fee requirements for
Drainage Area 101A, previously adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
I (c) Geology, Conditions of Approval Nos. 22 through
28 implement the geotechnical recommendations of Hallenbeck &
Associates, geotechnical engineering consultants for the Project,
as reviewed and considered by the County Geologist. Any area
Page 4 Resolution No. 76-1988
excavated for slide repair will be returned to a natural appearing
contour and hydjoseeded to avoid any visual impacts.
(d) Traffic and Circulation. The mitigation
measures identified in the Final EIR are implemented by Public
Works' Condition of Approval No. 38. '
(e) P.G. & E. Substation Site. Condition of
Approval No. S.L. requires the developer to provide a berm and
landscaping along the P.G. & E. frontage with the authorization of
P.G. & E. , providing for mitigation in addition to that required
under the text of the General Plan Amendment regarding the P.G. &
E. site.
(f) Northeast Road. Condition of Approval No. 5.H.
requires that the northeast road connecting the northwest portion
of the Project ,to the balance of the Project shall be constructed
consistent with the Preliminary Profile by Ferguson and Wollman
dated July 20, 1988 . As such, geotechnical and visual impacts are
mitigated. Site review by Staff as well as several Planning
Commissioners has confirmed that visual impacts have been mitigated
as a result of ,the specific road design and criteria. Staff for
the Town of Danville has confirmed that geotechnical and visual
impacts have been substantially mitigated.
�(g) Vegetation and Wildlife. The existing riparian
corridor will be replaced with a creek through the detention basin
with a reintroduced and improved riparian habitat.
, (h) Parks and Recreation. Condition of Approval No.
29 requires the payment of parkland dedication in the amount
requested by the Town of Danville to be used for improvements to
the planned community park facility in the Tassajara Ranch project.
In addition, on-site recreational amenities are provided under the
Final Development Plan Condition of Approval No. 8) . Finally,
consistent with Condition of Approval No. 5.F. , a public and
private trail system will be provided.
I (i) Archeology. Mitigated by site-specific review
at the time of
� (j )
icon
Air Quality. Mitigated by limitations in
Conditions of Approval Nos. 35 and 37 on construction activity, in
addition to standard building and grading code requirements.
� (k) Energy. Houses in the Project will be designed
with the highest and best energy saving devices and practices in
conformance with current U.B.C. Guidelines and requirements. This
impact is, therefore, adequately mitigated.
I. .
Page 5 Resolution No. 76-1988
5. Statement of Overriding Considerations: San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Comisission hereby adopts the Statement of
Overriding Considerations in Exhibit "A" .
6. Alternatives Analysis. San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission hereby adopts the Alternatives Analysis in Exhibit "A" ,
applicable here because, for one reason, the Bettencourt Ranch
Project is substantially similar to the concept plan addressed in
the Final EIR.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission makes the following additional findings,
determinations and orders in recommending the Project to the Board
of Supervisors:
7. The Bettencourt Ranch Project is consistent with the
General Plan which authorizes as many as 470 dwelling units for the
property. The project is substantially consistent with the Camino
Tassajara General Plan Amendment, based on but not limited to the
following:
(a) The location of and development criteria for the
northeast road;
(b) Limitation of development in the northeast
corner to the 975-foot elevation, all of which will not be visible
from the south of the ridge;
(c) Development on the Camino Tassajara side of the
ridge will be consistent with the Danville Scenic Hillside and
Major Ridgeline Ordinance;
(d) The detention basin has been designed and
located as required in the GPA;
(e) Development is limited to the development area
identified in the GPA;'
(f ) Camino Tassajara. landscape setbacks and enhance-
ments are consistent with the requirements in the GPA;
�(g) Off-site road obligations are consistent with
the Crow Canyon Traffic Joint Powers Agreement;
�(h) The public and private trail plan is substan-
tially consistent with the schematic requirements and intent of the
GPA;
(i) Camino Tassajara Road will be relocated and
realigned at the' "Bettencourt Curve" ; and
Paye 6 Resolution No. 76-1988
(j ) Grading and internal circulation had .been
coordinated between this site and the Ujdur and Shadow Creek
developments (see the exhibit by Ferguson and Wollman providing a
grading detail at the property line with the Ujdur development) .
Public access through the Bettencourt Ranch Project is not a
requirement of the General Plan in order to provide coordination of
internal circulation.
Furthermore, the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment is
consistent with the Contra Costa County General Plan and, more
particularly, the San Ramon Valley Area General Plan, and each of
the elements therein, is in the public interest and consistent with
State General Plan Law, Section 65300, et seq. , and is consistent
with the State's open Space Lands Act, Sections 65560, et seq. , all
as more fully set forth in Paragraph No. 3 , on page three of
Resolution No. 29-1988, attached as part of Exhibit "A" .
8. Consistent with County ordinance Section 84-66.1406, the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission is satisfied that:
,(a) The developer intends to start construction
within two one-half years from the effective date of the zoning
change and preliminary development plan approval; and
(.b) The proposed planned unit development is
consistent with the County General Plan as described above; and
(c) This residential development will constitute a
residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, it
will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding
neighborhood and community, given it' s suburban, custom
single-family concept with significant visual openspace preserved.
The property is, affected by special circumstances and conditions
consisting of olling hillside topography, on which the project
design can be enhanced by development of the site as a planned unit
development, maximizing open-space areas, a common area, public and
private trail System, and integrated street design.
6. Consistent with Government. Code Section 66426, this
subdivision shall provide, to the extent feasible for future
passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities.
7. The subdivision' s design and improvement are consistent
with General Plan for the reasons set forth above.
S. This site is physically suitable for the type of
development and its proposed density, will not cause substantial
environmental damage or substantial unavoidable injury to fish or
wildlife or their habitat, and will not cause serious public health
Problems, consistent with the environmental findings set forth
above and in Exhibit "A" .
:Page 7 Resolution No. 76-1988
9. As further findings and reasons in support of the approval
of the Bettencourt Ranch Project, the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission adopts and hereby incorporates by reference the
analysis set forth in the Staff Reports and attachments thereto for
the Project and the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission, recommends that the Board 'of Supervisors
.approve and adopt the proposed Bettencourt Ranch Project for a
maximum of 469 dwelling units including the Conditions of Approval
attached hereto as Exhibit "B" .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission hereby approves the Vesting Tentative Map for
Subdivision No.17188, subject to and contingent upon approval by
the Board of Supervisors of Rezoning 2816-RZ and Final Development
Plan No. 3034-88.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chairman and Secretary of the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission shall respectively
sign and attest the certified copy of this Resolution and deliver
same to the Board of Supervisors, all in accordance with the
planning laws of the State of California.
By motion on Wednesday, December 7, 1988 , the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission certified the adequacy of the prior
EIR, Notice of Intent, and responses to comments for purposes of
satisfying the requirements of the California Environmental Quality
Act, recommended to the Board of Supervisors that Rezoning 2816-RZ
and Final Development Plan No. 3034-88 be approved, and approved
Vesting Tentative Map for Subdivision No. 7188, subject to and
contingent upon approval by the Board of the rezoning and final
development plan, and instructed the Staff to prepare a resolution
and findings consistent with the foregoing, all by the following
vote:
AYES: Commissioners. - Nudelman, Kaye, Auch, Cardinale,
Lehman, Moore, Cameron
NOES: Commissioners - None
ABSENT: Commissioners - None
ABSTAIN: Commissioners - None
The foregoing was duly called and held in accordance with the
law on Wednesday, December 21, 1988 and this Resolution including
Exhibits "A" and "B" , was duly and readily passed and adopted by
the following vote of the Commission:
I
Page 8 Resolution No. 76-2988
AYES: Commissioners - Kaye, Moore, Auch, Lehman, Cameron
NOES: Commissioners - None
ABSENT: Commissioners - Nudelman
ABSTAIN: Commissioners - Cardinale
WANK G. C ERON, Chairman of the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission,. County of Contra Costa,
State of California
ATTEST:
i ,
WY E B GDON, Secretary of the
Ramo IffIley Regional Planning
Commission County of Contra Costa,
State of California
f .
j •.
findings Map
i
o
P•1 �;:• _
r E:
X.
:': �:;F•': :
Rezone From A-4 To P_I _ MWILAX Area
1
3, FA'A�S/k C•{iM'E,ep�l ,Chairman of the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission, Contra Costa County, State of California,
do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy ofP.� "a T--i9,
41.19 of ME C4ft1vrY%'>
i
indicating thereon the decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission in the matter of '•4DDc2;;Le L04"Al
hairman of the an Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission, State of California
A I
• I
tary than Ramon Valley Regional
fanning Comfission, State of California
IPA4C 4W a5c -?We
Findings Map
'� :.f
A•2
i•.
�'f' / p TASSAJARA
A'3
P•1
!
/ CULET LN
Rezone From, A-4 To F-/ D4*044-e Area
I, XZ"Z C4MATZ 1 'Chairman of the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission, Contra Costa County, State of California,
do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
U-I f OF iTi* QM� 1972- ZGW/N!s NAO
indicating thereon the decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission in the matter of A( 440640/
Y
Chairman of th an Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission, State of California
A T:
etary the n Ramon Valley Regional
--Fanning Com sion, State of California
rl''.4f�E 77rWO AV WW
EXHIBIT_ A t .
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Harvey E. Bragdon vuf)tfd
Director of Community Development old
DJITE: August 3, 1988 CO "`Y
SUBJECT: Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment Findings Vw
I
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) t BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOAII'lENDATI CN
'Approve the revised California Environmental Quality Act findings
on the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment (Attachment A).
FISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
On August 2, 1988 the Board of Supervisors approved the Camino
Tassajara General Plan Amendment with minor modifications and
directed staff to include this in one of the County's combined plan
amendments for 1988. These revised CEQA findings modify those
adopted by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commis ion to be
consistent with the plan changes approved by the Board.
001NTINVP.D ON ATTACMDIT: _ YES SIGMA
UARD
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECO OMITT:
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON A u q u e t 9� t 4 p R APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED ,)j� GTEMR
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
_ AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABST AIN: KINUTES OF THE HOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE S8OWlt.
cc: Community Development ATTESTED 94"p--.9. #q.9 1,
CAO PHIL BATC ,pR CLERIC OF
County Counsel TIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
_` _ ,j,•�� ._City of Danville _ Co...(, I AD![IKISTjlATaR
BY
JC:cq
cd7/ctasajra.bo
i.�....r��._..�_-.. �._ •.. ..-.�_�.� _ �—.�a�. .=�ar�... we+ii Win. _•i
ATTACEMENT A ,
Revised Findings and Declarations on the
Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment
In making its recommendations on the Camino Tassajara
General Plan Amendment, the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission approved Resolution No. 29-1988 and Exhibit "A"
thereto, the CEQA Findings. The text and map of the .General
Plan Amendment as approved by the Board of Supervisors is
somewhat different than as recommended by the Planning
Commission. Therefore, the Board adopts Resolution No. 29-1988
of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission and Exhibit
"A, " the CEQA Findings, to the Resolution as its own, all
attached hereto as Exhibit "1" and fully incorporated herein,
and makes all of the findings and declarations therein, with the
following changes, exceptions and additions to address changes
• in the text and map as approved:
A. Pace 3 of Resolution No. 29-1988: In
addition to the other information li r.sted in
. 'this paragraph,, the Findings are based on the
Staff Reports and information provided in the
Board packets and testimony and information
p1rovided through' the public hearing
=_process. Since development on the "saddle
and spur" is not being allowed, the last
- sentence of this paragraph (13 lines) ,
discussing such development , is deleted. _
B. Pace 2 of Exhibit "A, " CEQA Findings The
TIME paragraph regarding mitigation for loss
Of open space is modified to read as follows: ;
_ - The...-.Camino .Tassajara General Plan Amendment, .=
Dot-h— by the map and text precludes
.. �/trwLri.ilk!7{ •'Mir+.�•�Iy...-aw.�rYlrfl•_•_.r..
: . 111 -1- •'."..�. �..
wwp� -F•.r�_+!`^_mow-'rs_ rrr�•.�� ._ a_ ..
development upon any major or significant ,
ridgeline. It also provides that development
on. the. -Camino Tassajara . Road side of the
Hetteticovr't, Ranch will be consistent with
Danville Scenic Hillside and Major Ridgeline
Ordinance. Therefore, development on that
. _side will not occur within one hundred (100)
vertical feet of any major ridgeline on the
property,. . Development on the north side of
the ridge will be consistent with development
in. the Blackhawk community and not be visible
trom the south. A road along the eastern
boundary of the Bettencourt Ranch connecting
the northeast corner with the balance of the
_.. . project will only be allowed if geotechnical
- 'and visual impacts, if any, are mitigated.
_ . Such mitigation measures shall be considered
and ' developed through the development plan
process.. Additional environmental review, if
necessary, to analyze that roadway and a
private drive to the homes on the hillside
portion of the development area in the
northeast corner shall be undertaken throucn
the development plan. process . Native
reforestation near the roadway will be
required as necessary to miticate visual
impact . The details o: such a roadway and
Hillside development in the nor:-east
development area are no: apprepria:e for
consideration at this General Plan stac_e and
will be addressed subsecuentlThe
' e
potential for such a connecting roadway has
been adequately addressed in the EIR through
the general ridgeline and hillsice
development analysis in the FEIR. There is
-no -- substantial evidence in the record to
suggest that at this time a subsequent or
supplemental environmental impact report is
required to accommodate the development of
_. such a connecting roadway and the hillside
development in the northeast corner . Major
--Revisions in the FEIR for the General Plan
Amendment are not recuireC.
This Attachment A and Exhibit thereto constitute
-add itional findings and declarations under the California
-' Envrronmental--Quality Act - and State Planning Law-'—and
.mow.....-..._..was�r�'...r�
..
—2—
alp
2— ,.ww
otherwise appropriate in approving this amendment to the Land
:�Us�,-Circc�laton�:.5cenc. Routes and_Recreation Elements of .the
-,County Genera�•_Phn.;- .-- -• .. ._ .- - ._ ._•_ _
i
_ .r
RESOLUTION NO, 29-1988
RESOLUTION DF THE SAN RAMON _VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATING
FINDINGS AND RECOMMINDATIONS FOR THE CAMINO TASSAJARA ROAD GENERAL
. PLAN AMENDMENT (1-87-SR) FOR THE CAMINO TASSAJARA ROAD AREA
ENCOMPASSING THE B=ENCOURT RANCH, UDJUR AND MRACR ROAD EASTERLY
DEVELOPMENT +AREA PROPERTIES. -
WHEREAS; on September 23, 1986 , consistent with requests from
the owners and developers of the Bettencourt Ranch and Udjur
properties,- the Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County
directed the Community Development Department to conduct-a General
Plan study for an amendment to the San Ramon Valley Area General
Plan, entitled Camino Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment
(1-87-SR) . The property encompassed by this proposed Camino
Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment includes the area north of
Camino Tassajlara Road and south of the Blackhawk development and is
bordered on the west by the Blackhawk commercial area and on the
east by the Dame. Shadow Creek project. The property owners and
developers respectively requested -the following changes in land use
designation:
(1) On the Bettencourt Ranch from Agricultural Preserve to
Single Family Residential Low-Density;
(2 ) On the Udjur property, frorm Single Family Residential
Low-Density to multiple Family Residential Low-Density;
( 3 ) On the Mrack Road Easterly Development Area, no specific
• request was made; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State and County CEQA
Guidelines, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) was prepared
in connection with the proposed Camino Tassajara Road General Plan
Amendment. The DEIR was circulated for comment as required by law.
In addition, a public hearing was held on January 6, 1988, to
solicit oral -comments to the DEIR. The Final Environmental •Impact
Report (FEIR) ; •consisting of the DEIR and the responses to comments
on the DEIR, was subsequently filed with the Contra Costa County
Community Development Department. On February 17 , 1988 , the San
Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission indicated its intent to
certify the FEIR as adequate under CEQA; and
WHEREAS, after providing notice as required by law, the San
Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission reviewed and considered
the •proposed Camino Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment, .•the
�.-current-General :Plans .for Contra Costa County, the Town of = • '°"`="'`�
Danville, staff reports prepared by Contra Costa County Community
Development Department, the TJ"I Crow Canyon Corridor traffic ' -~•
studies, the Contra Costa County Growth Trends 1985 and 1987
studies, the 1987 Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement Re Tassajara-__:_.
., _ „- I 1.�.lJiNL.✓-..fL M•. .' .y�. �.•N�t��L..M�Y..Y!•/►w..r.�. �....... r�
Page 2 Resolution No. 29-1988
Area Transportation Improvement Fees, the FEIR, exhibits presented
at the_.hearings and written and oral testimony received at the
public hearings-'on April 20, 1988, and May 4, 1988. The San Ramon
Valley Regional Planning Commission thereupon took the actions
hereinafter set forth.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission hereby certifies, resolves and finds
as follows:
1. The San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
(Commission) hereby certifies that:
a. In making its recommendation, it has reviewed and
considered the information contained in the Final Environmental
Impact Report (FEIR) consisting of the DEIR dated October 19, 1987 ,
and the comments and responses thereto dated February 1988 (all of
which are collectively referred to herein as the "final EIR" or
FEIR) ; and
b. The FEIR is adequate and complete and has been
prepared and processed in compliance with CEQA and State and County
CEQA Guidelines; and
2. The FEIR has been prepared as a single EIR to describe
all development projects with the Camino Tassajara Road General
Plan Amendment and it is anticipated that such future pr-jects and
"their circumstances will be essentially the same in terms of
environmental impact. Therefore, it is contemplated that for
future development projects in the area, the EIR for the Camino
Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment will be utilized, consistent
with Section 15153 of the CEQA Guildelines, as an EIR from an
earlier project. Significant environmental impacts identified by
the FEIR are predominately impacts associated with development
proposals consistent with the General Plan Amendment for the
Bettencourt and Udjur properties. Therefore, the significant
environmental impacts identified in' the FEIR to a large extent must
be mitigated by the design of and conditions of approval imposed on
individual development projects within the General Plan area.
Nevertheless, certain general environmental impacts identified in
the FEIR have been mitigated by direction provided in the Camino
Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment itself for restrictions on
development. Exhibit "A", entitled "CEQA Findings", attached
hereto and fully incorporated herein, identifies impacts and their
mitigation measures implemented through the Camino Tassajara Road
General Plan Amendment and proposed for future development
projects, -and unavoidable impacts requiring a Statement of
Overriding Considerations. Analysis consistent with State of
California CEQA Guidelines Section 15153 on future development '" '':
projects shall confirm whether or not future development projects.
- incorporate design measures or conditions of approval that mitigate -
.�.....�.��r.. ... .e..•.►,....�..►,— . ..•— ...R�R�.r��jj 'j par r •74
Page 3 Resolution No. 29-1988
impacts, pr whether the overriding considerations referenced in
Exhibit "A" lust apply; and
. ' 3. The San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission hereby
recommends to. the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors the
amendments to the San Ramon Valley Area General Plan as detaiied in
Exhibit "B" attached• hereto and fully incorporated herein
specificaliy, the text amendment to the Land Use Element of the San
Ramon Valley Area General Plan, the Amendment to the existing Land
Use Map, the Amendment to the County Trails Plan and the Amendments
to the Circulation and Scenic Routes Elements; and
4. The San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission finds
that the Camino Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment is a fine
tuning, of• the! San Ramon Valley. Area General Plan in that it
completes they urban General Plan designation of the Crow Canyon
Corridor Area, formerly referred to as Stage III-A designated . for
urban use as part of the 2218-RZ agricultural zoning and land use
policy of Contra Costa County and is otherwise appropriate for the
reasons cited� in the Staff Report and Recommendation. Further, the
Camino Tassajara Road General Plan Amendment is internally
consistent with the Contra Costa County General Plan and, more
particularly,1the San Ramon Valley Area General Plan, and each of
the elements therein, is in the public interest and consistent with
the State General Plan Law, Sections 65300 , et seq. and is
consistent with the State Open Space Lands Act, Sections 65560 , et
seq. These findings are based on, among other things , the
• information set forth in the Staff Report and Reccmmendation, the
FEIR, Resolution No. 87/704 and findings attached as Exhibit "A"
thereto approving Tentative Cancellation for a portion of Land
Conservation Contract 22-69 on the Bettencourt Ranch, and the
testimony and evidence presented at the hearings. In particular,
as to the Bettencourt Ranch, the findings are in part based upon
the determination of the Commission that the saddle and spur
referenced above are not a part of a major or significant ridgeline
on the property and are otherwise appropriate for reasonable, .
limited development, providing some visual interest and relief near
the ridgelinelopen space, any development on the ridgelines shall
be confined to the two lots located above the 975 foot elevation
near the easterly boundary of the Bettenccurt Ranch site that are
accessed by a private driveway, as shown on the Preliminary
Landscape Plan dated received by Community Development Department
on June 1, 1988, landscaping shall be provided to visually buffer
the roadway for a natural forested appearance; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the San Ramon
—Valley -Regional -Planning Commission shall sign and attest- a"--' --z --.'-==-
certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board
. of Supervisors all in- accordance with the Planning Laws of the - -
State of California. _
Xft
�.�w't.[-.+r�._•w•-!� r• ..�. `�—.moi��� � — 1 ��wi
• •,,� ;
or
Y
Page 4 Resolution No. 29-1988
. .. -.. The instructions by the- San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission to prepare this resolution were given by motion of the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission on Wednesday, May 4,
1988, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners - Cardinale, Nudelman, Cameron, Kaye
NOES: Commissioners - Lehman, Moore, Freeman
ABSTAIN: - Commissioners - None
ABSENT: � Commissioners_- None
The foregoing.was duly called and held in accordance with the
law on Wednesday, June 1 , 1988, and this resolution was duly and
regularly passed and adopted by the following vote of the
Commission:
AYES: Commissioners - Cardinale, Nudelman, Cameron, Kaye
NOES: Commissioners - Lehman, Moore
ABSTAIN: Commissioners - None
ABSENT: Commissioners - Freeman
FRANK G. CAIdERCN
vice-Chairman of the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Ccmmiss_cn, County
of Contra Costa, State of California
ATTEST:
Secr� f he an Ramon valley
Regio�.Po an ing Commission, County
of CorCosta, State c_ California
:.+.:_ '_w`�- -�:.+t 3�' ^•i:.� ,-— Vii..'- -' +.►.. T___ _ � .�_� .� -�,. ..
JWC:plpSRII
.. .�—.+.�,.a.-.+....►ice •...-�.I., •..-...... ...... �...-- -� .. �.•o:`. .� —i �- _. .
_Na.
i
4 �
CEQA FINDINGS
Exhibit "A". To Resolution No. 29-1988
I . Pursuant to Public Resources Code 521081 and State of
California CEQA Guidelines 515091 , the approval of a project
requires the approving agency to evaluate the proposed project
-in light of the significant impacts identified by the
Environmental Impact Report and impose mitigation measures on
the project to reduce those impacts below levels of sicnificance
or alternatively to find that there is an overridincc - concern
which would take- •precedence over the significant environmental
impact identified. Such evaluation requires that affirmative
findings bie made by the lead agency so as to present a logical
e
means to valuate the impacts, mitications and reascnina of the
approving agency. This Final Env:renmental Impact Repert (FEI=)
has been prepared with the intent that it may be utilized as a
single EIR to describe not only the Camino Tassajara General
Plan Amendment , but subsequent develcpment prc�ects , including ,
but not limited to planned unit deveicpTent zcning and tentative
subdivision maps . As such, many o: the impacts and mitigation
measures identified therein will to more fully addressed throng^
the design of and conditions cr approval for the subsecuent
development protects witnin the C:::r:no Tassa;ara General Plan
Amendment Area . ^_•`•e :;,!!cw nc _ _:•dines cc-.cern cer.era_ly the
application of thi= and C requirements :or the Camino
Tassajara Genera_ : mEnd:-ent -
II . The San R:. . .,.. :-a__e: ..:e= Rec_cnal . __.^.^.ne C,-m-iss:on
makes t,'-,e fo_low nc f:nc:^cs wit.. retard to the rec=,rriended
Camino Tassajara Genera_ ?'an Amendment ( 1-87-SR) and the
analysis of its impacts ccnsistent with the Fry-
and the
requirements of CEQ+:
• A. BETTENCOURT RANCH PROPERTY.
The FE'R -dent ' es impacts r elated to the
proposed development of the =_et_encourt Ranc!: pr„o2rty to
include:
(1) Open Space.
..r........._.r _ ._ Impact A ccncern is the _ ct
development on :.4dce::ne areas ::o,:?c: have on :he :c„ `
opet:
space and lalso the visual intecr :tv o_ the prc;ec- ,:; Camino
Tassajara Road is considered a scenic thoroughfare .
-
-'
Mitiaa_ tion: The Camino Tassajara GeneraX
Plan Amendment, both by the map and text precludes development' ,
on any major .or significant ridgeline. It also provides that
development on the Bettencourt Ranch property will be consistent
with the Danville Scenic Hillside and Major Ridgeline ordinance.
Therefore; development will not occur within one hundred (100)
vertical 'feet of any major ridgeline on the property. The
saddle and spur near the east end of the property are not part
of a major or significant ridgeline. Development on the saddle
and spur shall be consistent with sensitive hillside development
practices and limited to a roadway, connecting the northeast
development area with the balance of the community, and to a
small number- of homes . Any homes on the spur shall be of single
story profile to mitigate visual impact . Native reforestation
near the Iroadway will be required to mitigate visual impact .
Such visually sensitive development of the saddle and spur will
provide for appropriate visual interest and relief adjoining the
ridgeline.
(2) Drainage Facilities .
Imoact : The FEIR states that runoff from the
project is expected to double with a resultant worsening of
current flooding conditions confronting the downstream property
owners .
Mitication: The Camino Tassajara General
Plan Amendment mitigates such -4-pact by desicnating a de=enticn
basin with riparian and visual enhancements to oe crested in an
area adjacent to Camino Tassaiara where the current creep
channel exlists.
(3) Geology.
Imnact : The Bettencourt Ranch pr-perty has
an average slope of 29.7 percent with approximately fifty
percent ( 50%) of the property identified as slide ceteris anc
area of heavy erosion. As such, there is significant potential
for sliding and property destruction unless develoomen't occurs
in a well-planned manner .
Mitigation: The Camino Tassajara General
Plan Amendment requires there to be general open space on the
Bettencourt Ranch property. Suc' open space wild be
predominantly located on steep hillsides and wi.'_ '_ - prevent
development of these hillsides and therefore miticate the
geologic impacts. Additionally, the project is to be rezoned to
planned unlit development . As such zonina progresses , spec; ::c
conditions must be imposed and land planning designs utilized to
that slope stability is enhanced. -
_2-
�...�.. .�.,.,,.1ta..••.-..,.. ——.r. ..._._ ..� - �.--ri�'.•!�"+�---w:��a.:.:_ .._ ..:� — -;.15.,x.
(4) Traffic and Circulation.
rmmvactt : The' Bettencourt Ranch project is
currently anticipated to include no. more than four hundred
seventy (470) homes. The Udjur project is currently an
to include �no .more than approximately one hundred thirteen (113 )
homes. The Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment contem-
plates , at most , approximately thirty-five ( 35 ) units for the
Mrack Road Easterly Development Area. The traffic impact of the
resulting homeowners is considered to be significant on Camino
Tassajara, Sycamore Valley Road , and Crow Canyon Roa%.
Additionally, the "Bettencourt curve" portion o= Camino
Tassajara Road is presently dangerous for both drivers and
pedestrians.
mitication: The Camino Tassajara General
Plan. Amendment designates realignment of the "Bettencourt curve"
on the Betltencourt Ranch prcper:y. Additionally, the overall
traffic impact of the development of the -ettencour: Ranch and
Udjur property were considered in the desicn o: improvements to
Camino Tassajara Road, Crow Canyon Rcac and Sycamore Valley
Road. As such, the Bettencourt and Ud ur deveicpers nave adreec
to participate in the 1987 Joint Zxercise o: Powers Agreement Re
Tassajara Area Transportation imprcvement sees , which identifies
the seven (7 ) Camino Tassa ara!Sycamore Va__ev orejec_s as the
funding source for improvements recu_, rec by the buil.:-out of
such projects. Road::av caoac:ty for t!^e cevP_ooment of the
Bettencourt) and UC •ur pro-erties _s evidenced . . cm _he _r87 ^_.:3"
Traffic Stucy for the Crcw Canyon Ccr. _cc. and =_pp:eme^:
incorporated herein, as well as -ne acc: __cna_ tra__ _c a^alv;:s
- in. the body of t^e Fr-:R. - -.c c<<: :cc-e _ :he :
Mrack Road IEaster_y Development Aw
rea : __ have :.o:;:ina_ tram°ic
impacts that wi'_1 be miticatec by the improvements iden: :_ ied in
the above referenced traffic rzp�-rts ar.c t^e .'tint Exercise of
Powers Agreement .
(5) PG&E Substation Site.
Imp_: Pacific Gas & Electric Cc-pany owns
a site on the Bettencourt Rancn property to be uses a's an
electrical substation. That site is adjacent to the p;opc5ed
realigned Camino Tassajara Road• and could have a severe visual
impact fronting along app:cx!ma:ei., Five hunCred s:.;-:y ( 560 )
feet of Camino Tassajara . Vi=ua_ impact is an :-:portant
consideration in that Camino Tassa;ara is designated as a scenic
corridor .
Miticat :cn: The Cat„i::C Tassaj;:ra General
Plan Amendment specifically sets fortn guidelines for the
utilization, of this site as_ a substation. Predominant. -within
those guidelines are the design and landscaping of the sub-
station so as to provide a minimum of visual impact . To assure
such minimum impact , the exterior design is to be reviewed and
approved by the San Ramon valley Regional Planning Co.:..,nission,
consistent with that which is typically required for other
developers .
B� UDJUR PROPERTY.
Impact : In addition to its contribution to common
impacts referreo to hereinabove, the Udjur property project has
an impaction adjoining development in that its density is
greater and its patio home desion different than existinc and
anticipated development in the area . By such design t^ere will
be limited open space present in the project and a red-:ction of
open space in the General Plan Amendment area.
Mitigation On its face, the Camino Tassa=ara
General Plan Amendment limits development of the property tothe
high end of the Sincle-Family Residential Low-Density rance
(approximately one hundred thirteen ( 113 ) patio h% -es ) . it
further recuires that there be recreational amenities and
en spaces within the future development . '_':rase open.
internal op
spaces shall provide visual relief and physically breat up the
density of the project . Further , the Camino Tassa;a:a Ce-neral
Plan Amendment requires there to be a landscape buffer and a
masonry wail between the Udjur property and the commercial uses
to the west and the Slackhawk homes to the n;zrth i:: order to
minimize conflicts between different land uses and. res:dent ia?
densities . Acditiona'_:!, in order to reduce can: __ _ bet- een
the Udjur property anc the propesec 3ettencolurt Rar.cn prosect ,
41 grading and internal circulation are to be coordinated between
the two sites , thereby preventing great disparity in ::.t levels
and street alignments.
C. EASTERLY DEVELOPMENT AREA (MRACK ROAD) .
The Mrack Road Easterly Development Area includes
approximately forty-twc (42 ) acres currently desicnated as
Country Estate. The Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment
reaffirms the Country Estate designation for this area . - Witt^.
such designation, development impacts are minimized and an
alternative Country Estate lifestyle is retained in the Ca ino
Tassajara Road portion of the Crow Canyon Corridor area . In
this manner , development may cake place individually and through
minor subdivisions in minimum one-acre parcels (Sbsent a "
variance) which will also be ccr:Dstible with the adjacent
Creek and Bettencourt Ranch prc,;ccts . Site specific cr; :ie and
other impacts , if an.: , shall be mitigated throucn project
'conditions of approval .
-4-
.. -. .-. .►.r�.�i�il:.��.ji•�1--�.r-ww"�•.-.�. .. �. .._.... _ ... _ .. ... .. -`..�;7�-+.-`.�-r-+'t� � ..:..:. �ii�i�.r.;�
CUMULATIVE IMPACTS. too
(1) The San Ramon Valley Area Regional Planning
Commission has considered environmental impacts of the
-cumulative development allowed by and the growth inducing impact
of the Camino. Tassajara General Plan P.mendment , and hereby makes
the following findings:. ,
(a ) As referenced in Section 1 , th:c'cn the
design and conp
conditions of approval for future development
projects for 3ettencourt Ranch, the Udjur property and the ..rack
Road Easterly Development Area , specific environnental impacts
caused by such development projects (consistent with the Camino
Tassajara General P1an. Amendment ) will be miticated. Individual
impacts to be mitigated, in . part as more specifically discussed
above, incl
ude: ( 1) Public Services and Utilities (a ) schools :
mitigated payment of impact gees; c) tra::ic: mitigated by
payment of impact "fees and construction of roads ; c) sewace :
payment of impact fees and/or construction of :aci'_ties and
utilization of water consur,.ption reduction devices ; c) water :
prorated payment of planning and capital costs for extension of
water service and enlargement of facilities ; e) police: site
specific crime prevention measures ; f ) fire : consistency with
fire district recommendations and payment of any itr.z.:ct fees ;
and g ) general services: eventual annexation to the Town of
Danville) ; (2) Slope Stability (m.iticated thrcuch site specific
design to the extent not otherwise ni:icated tr.:c::cn
restrictions on develComent area ) ; ( 3 ) Arch: •pc:::-e . :e= c^ .'d
Visual Quality (mitigated t':rougn s::e aPec:_ :C �c-S_ICn
requirements) ; ( 4 ) Veeetaticn and
following the recommendations o: the o:o:cg:st _cr : ian and
• wetland enhancement and protection cf wildlife) ; ( � ) r?arks and
Recreation (mitigated by payment of park fees and pr�visio^ o:
trails ) ; (6) Archeology (mitigated by site specific review at
the time of construction) ; (7) Drainage and sl;:,d H.az_zrds
(mitigated by requiring an acceptao:e erosion cc::trcl and
vegetation plan and implementation of the proposed drainage
district ) ; (8) Air Quality (mitigated by imposing limitations On
construction activities ) ; (9 ) Noise (mitigated by site
restrictions on construction activities and design and
construction standards) ; (10) Enercv (mitigated by applica t or.
of active and passive solar systems and other efforts to reduce
long-term energy consumption for these projects ) .
(b) The cur+.ulat ive impacts and - a; ::th
inducing impact of theC31nlno :assajora General ?:an Amend-ment
combined with other existing and contemplated develc: ent :lore
been addressed as fol '_ows . As to the impact on Open Space,
ridgelines identified as major o: significant in the area have
been consistently protected and the visual integrity of -the
Camino —'Tassajara Road as a scenic thorouchfare has been
i
q-
preserved! Limited and visually mitigated development in the
saddle and. spur near the east end of the Bettencourt Ranch will'
provide visual interest and relief near the ridgeline open
space. As to Drainage and Flood Hazards, an area for the
regional (detention basin facility with riparian and visual
enhancements has been designated on the Bettencourt Ranch. As
to Geology and Soils Stability, the higher and steeper
elevations have generally been preserved as open space. As to
Traffic and Circulation, maximum unit counts for development in
the Crow Canvon Corridor Area in combination with other
development are well within the assumptions of the Crow Canyon
Corridor Traffic study and the Joint Exercise of Powers
Agreement (there is also sufficient capacity for the future
limited Country Estate development of the Mrack Road Easterly
Development Area ) . As to Parks and Recreation, trails have been
designated through the Bettencourt Ranch property consistent
with an overall trail plan and adequate public and private
.recreational facilities have been planned for in the area to be
financed by new development . Furthermore, the number of units
possible within the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment area
have been limited by the map and text such that impacts
generally have been minimized in this final stage of development
within the Crow Canyon Corridor Area . Other cumulative impacts
have been addressed (e.a. , Noise, Air Quality, and Wildlife ) by
common site specific mitigation measures .
(c) With regard to any cumulative
inducing impacts beyond the area of the Camino ':assa)ara Genera:
Plan Amendment , Contra Costa County ' s 2219-RZ rezcninc and
agricultural land use policies have c:eatec a ce.narc,:ticn
between u Dan development and more rural uses in the Tassajara
• and Dougherty Valleys . This Camino Tassajara General Plan
Amendment Ifits within the context of the 2218-RZ land use
policies as a completion of Stage III-A and the Crow Canycn
Corridor development area and , as such, will not induce growth
beyond thel urban limit lines provided for in 2218-RZ . Assuming
future urban development on the agricultural side of the 2218-RZ
zoning line, such development shall be responsible to develop
the necessary infrastructure to mitigate its cumulative impacts .
-EI ALTERNATIVE ANALYSES.
(1) No Project Alternative. The r.o _prcjec_
alternative is not found tc satisfy the housing needs c_ Ccnt:-
Costa County in that complete development of the C:,-%--' Canyon
Corridor Area , consistent with 2218-RZ , is .necessary, to provide
housing for the expanding emplo--nent centers in the :ay Area ,
particularly in southern Contra Costa County and nearby Alameda
County. JAdditionally, the . Camino Tassajara General plan
Amendment area is virtually surrounded by development projects. ::---=:
—The ietent�ion of this area as agricultural land would be
-o-
i
�.
inefficient for agricultural production because of the
incompatibility of such use with the Shadow Creek project , the""
Blackhawk Estates, and the Blackhawk commercial center bordering
the west side of the General Plan Amendment area.
(2) Environmentally Superior Alternatives.
(a) Udjur Propertv. The environmental
superior proposal for the Udjur property would provide for one
hundred seven ( 107 ) units on fifty-five thousand ( 55, 000 ) square
foot lots . ' It would also entail coordinated gradinc with
Bettencourt Ranch project and a masonary sound wall along Camino
Tassajara with attractive landscaping between that wall and the
roadway. Additionally, "color spots" would be distributed
throughout the project . The Camino Tassajara General Plan
Amendment , at the high range, allows up to approximately one
hundred thirteen ( 113 ) patio homes , but to mitigate that
additional impact the . project will be required to coordinate
with development of the Bettencourt Ranch, provide significant
landscape buffering within the project and provide a masonry
wall along Camino Tassajara with approtpriate landscaping . As
such, the project impacts are mitigated. As prcjec: soecif'_c
application's are made, the actual number o: units will be
determined land further mitigation r.av be imposed to ensure an
environmentally superior project .
(b) Bettencourt Ranch Prciect . ^';;e
Bettencourt. Ranch envircnmenta_ ' , supe p.te:- ;e p.ovices
predominantly for the prctec; _:.., c= _ne . _c=e__r.e: in •!:e
project , buffering of the ;G�_ ^subs.:.::cnf p: - ;_c� rf a-
adeauate detention basin wittiin ti^.e prc,lzc, ancvprcv,d; n5 for
• proper access to and adequate bu:'er:ng ::c.:. Can' nc ='assgjara
Road. The Camino Tassajara Gene:,al Plan r-rendment addresses
these concerns by requiring compliance with t^e Danvil:e Scenic
Hillside an1d Major Ridaeline Ordinance (par:ic:;Iar_y in areas
determined to be major or sicnifican: ricce'_i..^.es cn he site ) ,
significant landscaping and cesion criteria f;,: :he t'GoE
substation and an adequate storm, water deten::on ;,QzSn wi`ti
riparian and 'visual enhancements . Additiona: concerns noted in
the environmentally superior alternative ::ill be addressed as
project specific applications are :race b ::-e de:._;,per to
ensure that an environmentally superior projec: is c:e_z:ec .
(c) Integrated Project Alternative . T`'z
Commission has also cer.s_cerec tae possio:__ ::; c: ari :"'ecra_ed
Project between the 'Jd;�,:r and get:enccur t proper _ . .:� a `
:23
of primary donde-. is :he south est pot t:cn c. :he ?zt_en`ou_;
Ranch property and the ad;acent Lid ,
ur prcpzr:y . The ;,i •e,na._ve
.requires a Itransition of density providing for :ess dense
.. parcels on the Udjur property as it coordinates with th•elarge:
-"'dots:of --the Bettencourt Ranch project . It is dlso desiCred to
J91
,__�..
eliminate one access point onto Camino Tassajara Road. Thi
Commission recognizes that integrated and coordinated projects '
'Are appropriate but the purposes thereof may be equally achieved
by the use of well planned individual projects that recognize
the actual property lines but are designed to be complimentary
to each other on the . property border . Alternatives which
require one property owner to coordinate a project with another
property owner by actual physical integration are unacceptably
speculative. It is more appropriate to allow for the individual
developmenit of properties but address the border areas in a
manner that gives a compatible and complimentary property
transition.
(3) No Alternative Sites Development of the
subject properties consistent with the Camino Tassajara General
Plan Amendment completes the development of the Crow Canyon
Corridor Area (Stage III-A of the 2218-RZ ac::cultu:mr.
al
rezoning) . Alternative development sites in the San Rac
Valley are comprised of lands currently designated fcr
agricultural use under 2218-RZ. Therefore, there are no
alternative sites available to be considered =or the units and
urban land use designations contemplated herein, without causing
skip development of agricultural lands .
F� STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS.
The San Ramcn Valley Regional Planning C:�^^iiss:an
recognizes that the Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment
been recommended, contemplating continued orccez-Bina c,
development projects for at least the Bettenczurt Reno : and
- Udjur properties . Nevertheless , there are no actual develc::ment
plans and rezoning proposals before the Cc-:.nission. The
significant environmental impacts identified by the Fr-'_R vary
from more general impacts to very site specific, impacts . The'
Camino Tassajara General Plan Amendment addresses t::cse more
general impacts by putting general limitations on development
densities , areas appropriate for development , flood control
concerns , specific aesthetic concerns and general traffic
concerns. There are certain impacts identified within. the FE:R
Which have not been mitigated by the .Camino ^_'assajara General
Plan Amendment. Those impacts will be addressed as part cf
subsequent development projects. for the individual properties in
the area .
To the extent that general area-wide and ' spe"i=ic ---.
impacts have not been and %iii- not be mitigated b, the Ca-ino
Tassajara General Plan Amendment , the Commission ::rids tnat suc!,
impacts are justified by the need to increase the housi^c suzp:v
in Contra Costa County in order to accommodate the Coun;y. s
_,_____growing population and employment base. The Association _ofArea Governments (ABAG) predicts a major short fall of housing
• •—.rte..'..�..-^^'ti--�-- r- - - .�... -. _ .. .. .- .:_ r. ..�..-.. �T !.:M• ..;.. r�• •��-
WIM
I
in the near future of up to twenty-five thousand (25,000) unite, ,
in the - area -if more land is not converted to housing. As
confirmed in the Growth Trends 1985 Study published by Contra
Costa County, there will be a need for approximately one hundred
ten thousand (110,000) new homes by the year 2005 in Contra
Costa County. Significant numbers of homes will be needed in
the San Ramon Valley area based on the employment opportunities
provided by Bishop Ranch and Hacienda Business Park . It is
important to provide homes in the Tassajara Area near the
employment centers to provide a reasonable local jobs-housinc
balance. Such impacts that may not be mit: cated Inc?ude, but
are not limited to impacts on - public service and utilities,
slope stability, drainage and flooding, loss of acricultural
land, visual impact , impacts on riparian habitats anc wildlife,
elimination of opeh"spabe;.. anal' buried prehistoric cultural
resources on the site, air quality, noise, energy, traffic and
circulation. Other Responsible Aoencies (e.c. :'own of Danville,
Local Agency Formation Commission, East Bay Municipal Utility
District, land Central Contra Costa Sanitarj District ) will be
reeuired to evaluate projects consistent .',it`. the Camino
Tassajara General Plan Amendment . :'his Statement of Overriding
Considerations may be applied by said Respons-.0le =.oe^cies n
the evaluation of the particular w;cects oe_cre tnen.
• EXHIBIT B
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2816-RZ, FINAL DEVELOP-
MENT PLAN 3034-88 AND VESTING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION 7188 (BETTENCOURT RANCH)
GENERAL CONDITIONS
1. Development shall be based on the following submitted exhibits except as
modified by the conditions below:
i
- Final Development Plan/Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map
- Revised Conceptual Landscape Plan dated received 11/9/88
- Bettencourt Ranch brochure
I
- Revised Front Entry Exhibit - Western Entrance, received 12/7/88
- Zoning PlIat
- 7/29/88 Hermans/Zalewski (Blackhawk Homeowners) Development Agreement
- Preliminary Detention Lake and Entry Plan
- Open space Vista Point Plan
- North Eait Road, Preliminary Profile, Sheets 1 and 2
- TassajarI Estate/Bettencourt Ranch Merged Exhibit
2. A maximum of 469 lots shall be permitted subject to further review pursuant
to conditions14 and 5. Approval of Vesting Tentative Subdivision 7188 is
contingent onl Final approval of Rezoning #2816-RZ and Final Development
Plan 3034-88 Eby the Board of Supervisors.
3. A phasing program for the development may be submitted for the review and
approval of the Zoning Administrator.
In the eventithat the Tassajara Estates (Ujdur) property comes under common
ownership with the Bettencourt Ranch Property, an Amended Final Development
Plan application for the Tassajara Estates Property shall be submitted for
approval of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission. The revised
Plan shall provide for a coordinated site plan addressing trail systems,
grading, circlulation and access limitations.
4. At least thirty (30) days prior to issuance of grading permits or filing of
a Final Map, revised grading and site plans shall be submitted for the
review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. At least six sets of
plans shall be submitted for referral by the County Community Development
Department to the Town of Danville, California Fish and Game Department,
Public Works Department, County Planning Geologist and other appropriate
public agencies.
A. No grading shall be permitted along the centerline (crest) of the
major unnamed ridgeline. Any proposal to regrade the crest will
1
require approval of a revised final development plan application by
;: . the San .R;amon Val ley_ Regional ,Pl.anning.:Commission. !:.A JE.' .
B.free i n the vi-ci n ty-of—tTie ri ff eTi ne sh-aTT Ue iTe iti f i e or pfes-
ervation �or elimination. A program shall be submitted to protect
.trees to be saved whose dripline is in an area for grading. Any
removed trees shall be replaced in kind.
C. No import or export of fill material is permitted without prior
approval �of the Zoning Administrator.
D. The revised site plans shall be in accord with the modifications
listed in Condition No. 5. below. The Zoning Administrator may reduce
the number of permitted lots in the review of the site plan.
E. In the event that drainage terraces are required to control erosion of
graded hillsides, the terraces should not exceed 5 feet in width and
should utilize earth tones.
F. Any slopes in excess of 25 feet in height should be bowed as to avoid
a flat alpearance.
G. The applicant shall coordinate its grading plan with that of the
adjoining Tassajara Estates project. Proposed grading pads, slopes
and-retainer walls on both properties shall be identified. Emergency
vehicular access with adequate road grades, a 24-foot turf-blocked
right-of1way and bollard connection shall be provided. Final plans
shall belsubject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator,
who shall submit the final grading plan to Danville and San Ramon Fire
District Ifor review and comment prior to his decision.
H. The northeast road shall be constructed consistent with the
Preliminary Profile by Ferguson and Wollman dated July 20, 1988. The
sidewalk1shall be relocated as part of the trail system. The downhill
criblock wall shall not exceed 11 feet in height in any location. The
uphill criblock wall shall not exceed 15 feet in height in any
location,. Split walls if appropriate to reduce visual impact shall be
used. The criblock wall shall be landscaped. Excavation and final
location of the roadways and criblock walls shall be such as to
minimize encroachment into the drip line of the existing surrounding
trees. A licensed arborist shall review the final roadway design and
make recommendations to the Zoning Administrator prior to his approval
of the final design. Native trees shall be provided and maintained as
_, part of the final landscape plan on the downhill side of the road
where necessary between Lots 422 and 423.
Any proposal to modify the approved design for the northeast road
shall belconsidered with an amended final development plan application
to be heard and considered by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission.
2
I. Parcel- B-i (remnant 'site)- and=the PG&E' s�ite� shall be subject�to` separate
zoning and development plan approval processes. However, as part of
the final grading plan for this project, Parcel B shall be filled in
to= road level or higher. In the event that a -development plan for
Parcel 6 .is not approved within two years, a 20-foot landscape.-ttrip,
consistent with the landscape buffer on the southside of Camino
Tassajara Road, shall be installed by the applicant. Final grading
and landscape plans shall be subject to review and approval by the
Zoning Administrator.
J. With respect to the PG&E site, the applicant shall diligently attempt
to obtain PG&E authorization to provide a berm along the PG&E frontage
during grading for the project, with the top of the berm at least 50
feet from the roadway at a 3:1 grade, and to install landscaping on
that frontage consistent with the project landscape buffer along
Camino Tassajara.
5. The site planlshall be modified as listed below.
A. Two additional tot lots shall be provided at a safe site near the
detention basin and at the clubhouse site.
B. The following lots shallbe further reviewed for lot design
conformity: 1, 21, 56, 79, 80, 156, 169, 299, 308, 309, 344, 352, 355,
433, 453, 454, 466 through 470.
C. A turnar,ound constructed to County standards shall be provided in the
vicinity of Lots 114 and 115. The roadbed between lots 217 and 218
shall beII widened to 32 feet.
D. A private road connection, constructed to County road standards, with
a 28-fo6t roadbed within a 32 foot right-of-way and adequate road
grades, lwith a carded gate, shall be provided to the Shadow Creek
public load.
E. Road intersections shall be designed with legs at right angles.
Grading and landscaping shall be designed so as not to interfere with
sight distance.
F. A public and private trail system shall be designed as generally shown
on the revised Preliminary Landscape Plan dated received November 9,
1988. The private trail system shall link homesites with recreational
facilities and the ridgeline area. The East Bay Regional Park
District shall be provided an opportunity to review and comment on the
trail design. The final design of the private trail system shall be
subject,to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator prior to
filing i final map.
A public trail right-of-way with a minimum 15-foot width shall be
provided on-site along the eastern boundary running from Camino
Tassajara to the ridgeline along the northern boundary. The easement
shall extend along the ridgeline to the western boundary of the site
3
and.provlidieg!Jor. a- pessible- futurb: connection to_ the north.onto the
Blackhawk property. The applicant shall offer to dedicate the-
proposedltrail - to the County or other-appropriate public agency.. The
dedication offer shall address the,. public=agency providing appropriate
fencing: jto. delineate. public and private property, and accepting
reasonable liability and maintenance responsibilities. Lots 290-293
shall - be redesigned to conform with the trail plan.
Fanal_de�sign of the public trail shall be subject to the review and
approval) of the Zoning Administrator. Trail improvement plans shall
be included inthe site_plan. submittal and shall provide for a.
pedestrian bridge across the creekbed. Until the dedication is
accepted. by a public agency, the trail shall function as a homeowner
association maintained trail .
The preferred trail alignment would be routed along the perimeter of
the detention basin; extending to the east along the creekbed
(crossing Oleson and Shadow Creek properties); and extending up the
hillside to the Bettencourt Ranch ridgeline. The applicant and the
County shall use diligent efforts to obtain the necessary right-of-way
for- this preferred alignment.
If this alignment utilizing adjoining properties proves infeasible,
then the applicant shall provide for the entire public trail to be
locatedon-siterunning along the eastern property line.
Approved on-site trail improvements shall be installed by the
applicant.
G. Corner. lots under 8,000 square feet shall be configured with 10
additional feet of width relative to nearby, interior lots of compara-
ble dimensions subject to final adjustment review and approval by the
Zoning Administrator.
'H. An enhanced landscape buffer shall be provided along the eastern
boundary of Lots 129 and 132 to buffer the residences on these lots
from the adjoining recreation center.
I. Lot 254 shall be deleted. The area of this lot together with the area
beneathithe adjoining P.G.and E. right-of-way shall be designed as a
common-turfed play field.
J. The following lot design modifications shall be provided:
1. Lots 16-20 shall be adjusted to provide for wider building pads.
Lot 29 shall be side-loaded.
2. Lots 30-33 shall be reconfigured to provide comparable lot width
between the four lots.
3. The slope on lots 41 and 42 shall be regraded onto lot 46.
4. A minimum 6,000 square feet shall be provided on lot 50.
4
5. . The .area near t5e western entrance including tot lot shall _ be
redesigned. in accord with the "Revised Front Entry Exhibit -
,Western_ Entrance" da �O, r.eceived 12/7/88..
.. - -
6-,.- .: Lot 92 shall-be side-loaded.
7._ The southwest corner of` lot 93rshall be adjusted to eliminate the
southwest corner angle (soften downhill grading) and reconfigure
lots 93-96 accordingly.
8. The cul-de-sac near lot 101 shall be adjusted 15 feet to the
west. The driveways for- lots 104 and 105; and 107 and 108 shall
be combined. The P.G. and E. access road and toe of slope next
to lot 104 shall be adjusted to the east to soften the grade at
thelsoutheast corner of lot.
9. A turnaround shall be provided in the vicinity of lots 113 and
114. The angle of the slope above lot 115 shall be softened to
135 degrees. The cul-de-sac adjoining lot 123 shall be shifted
to the west.
I
10. A 20 foot landscape strip, to be owned and maintained by the
Homeowner's Association, shall be provided along the frontage of
lots 1, 21, 43, 44, 56, 57, 67, 68, 80, 93, 116, 117, 118, 128,
1291, 130, 131, 137, 138, 139, 140, 308, 309 and 310.
11. Lots 167 and 168 shall be adjusted to provide softer grading.
12. The cut pad elevation of lots 233 and 234 shall be lowered to 900
feet AMSL (cut an additional 22-24 feet) .
13. Lotis 244 and 245 shall be reconfigured so that both lots front on
the' access road. The slope above the area of the former lot 244
shill be softened and rounded. Lot.246 may remain a flag lot.
14. A cul-de-sac street shall be provided to serve lots 248-253 and
replace the flag lot arrangement.
15. Adjust Lots 255-261 as required to impose the minimum pad width
_.. standard on lot 262.
16. Thegrade on the southwest side of lots 267 and 268 shall be
softened.
17. . Lots 290-296 should be adjusted and reconfigured as possible to
soften the slope north of lot 296.
18. Pedestrian path connections shall be provided north of lots 297
and 323.
19. A minimum rear lot -width of 55 feet shall be provided for lots
309 through 340 without exception.
20. The grading behind lot 355 shall be softened and the lot adjusted
iflpossible.
21. The pad elevation for lot 424 shall be at least 100 feet
vertically below the ridgeline (to about 912 foot elevation) .
22. The minimum lot width for lot 448 shall be 60 feet.
5
6. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC & R's) for a mandatory homeown-
ers association shall be submitted prior to approval of a Final Subdivision
Map. These_0Qcuments..shall provide for establishment, ownership, and
maintenance *of, the detention basin, common open space, private streets,
landscaping and. park areas. - The CC & R's shall indicate that a child care
facility may be located at any residential unit or lot, consistent with the
existing laws1 or any' common area or facility within the project. The CC &
R's shall provide for an architectural review committee to review
residential development, and for a weed abatement project. The CC & R's
shall prohibit development of second residential units within the project
consistent with existing laws.
Special architectural/landscape treatment and review of lot 136 is required
by the Homeowner's Association prior to issuance.of building permits. This
residence should serve as a design element for the project and contribute
to community identity. Perimeter fencing shall be restricted to
wrought-iron fencing. In addition to the standard construction plan
review, a perspective of the proposed residence shall be provided as viewed
from the access road near lot 93.
The CC & R's shall also provide that the homeowners association will be
required to work cooperatively with the County and P.G. & E. in the devel-
opment of a substation facility if and when such a facility is built. The
association shall be required to cooperate on area grading, fencing, access
and landscaping that will ultimately be required.
The Association shall retain a qualified naturalist on a permanent basis to
advise the Association on the maintenance of the open space areas.
RECREATIONAL FACILITIES
7. Final design plans for the clubhouse, tennis courts, tot lots shall be
subject to th!e review and approval of the Zoning Administrator prior to
issuance of b'uilding permits. An informal turfed playfield shall be
incorporatedlinto the design of the detention basin. A turfed playfield
shall be provided in the area of lot 254 and the adjoining P.G. and E.
right of way.
LANDSCAPING,
B. Final landscape irrigation plans for common open space area shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator.
A. The proposed plans shall be certified by a landscape architect to be
in accord with the County policies for drought-tolerant plants.
B. Oak trees and native shrubbery shall be planted at irregular intervals
and groupings along the access road adjacent to the Shadow Creek
project to screen the road from view.
i 6
• • x
C;, ,.....The._graded- open. space slopes. between residential terraces shall be
planted (and- irrigated) with. groundcover in addition to the proposed
trees so as to create a weed-free environment. Special landscape '
treatment shall be provided on the common open- space area below lots
>.1369 263, 264 and 265.
D. Irrigated criblock walls with cascading plants should be used for any
major sll pes requiring retaining walls.
E. Special Iripar-ian landscape treatment shall be proposed for the deten-
tion basin by a qualified riparian biologist. The plan should include
cattails and other native riparian species. The basin shall be
enclosed in a decorative six-foot tall open fence with self-closing
gates. kpedestrian/jogging trail and bridge shall encircle the
basin.
F. A decorative, "Blackhawk" soundwall shall be provided at the top of
the Camino Tassajara landscape- buffer. The wall shall run from the
Ujdur property to the east side of Lot 269 in three sections. A
decoratifve open fence shall run from Lot 269 to the eastern boundary
of the site. Landscape treatment along Camino Tassajara shall
coordinate with the Sycamore Valley and Blackhawk landscape buffer
treatment ..
G. A coordinated fence program shall be submitted for all project fencing
(perimeter, top of bank, residential ) . Top of bank fencing shall
generally be setback at least two feet from the edge of padded bank.
Open wire fencing (except cyclone) should be provided for upper
elevation lots.
I
H. The road abutting the Blackhawk property will be fenced with wrought
iron or solid wood fencing and be landscaped with shrubs and redwood
trees (approximately 10 feet on center) . The landscaping shall be
maintained by a homeowners association. Redwood trees (comparably
sized) will be planted on the Hermann's property (approximately 10
feet on center) as determined by the Zoning Administrator. The north
side of the road fronting Lots 425 through 431 shall be planted with
redwood trees approximately 10 feet on center.
I. A landscape strip of 20 feet minimum, owned and maintained by the
Homeowners' Association shall be 'provided along Lots 1, 21, 43, 44,
56, 57, 167, 68, 80, 93, 116, 117, 118, 128, 129, 130, 131, 137, 138,
139, 140, 308, 309 and 340. Landscape strips as otherwise provided on
the development plan and preliminary landscape plan shall remain. The
landscape strip satisfies sideyard requirements along the common
property, line. Lot configuration may be adjusted upon review and
approval by the Zoning Administrator to accommodate for the landscape
strips and avoid substandard lots.
URBAN SERVICE REORGANIZATION
7
r
9. Urban serviceiboundary reorganiiatibh shall -be consummated pOior to
recordation=ofthe Final' Map. The property shall ' be annexed tb=the- East
Bay Municipal Utility District and Central .Contra Costa Sanitary-District.
OPEN SPACE
10. Development rights to the open space areas shall be deeded in separate
documents to the County as a scenic easement with the recording of Final
Subdivision Maps.
11. At least 30 days prior to issuance of grading permits, a continuing open
space maintenance program shall be prepared by a qualified naturalist and
submitted forjthe review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The
approved program shall be referenced in the CC & R's. Access to the common
open space an'd a weed abatement program shall be established in
consultation with the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District.
I
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
12. A Transportation Systems Management (TSM) program, in compliance with
County policies, shall be submitted for the review and approval of the
Zoning Administrator prior to filing a subdivision map. An on-going
program shall be established to notify residents of transit opportunities
in the area, and encourage and facilitate carpooling among residents.
PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC PROPERTY
13. Prior to filing a grading permit, the applicant shall offer to construct a
14-foot tall berm across the front of P.G. & E. 's site.
14. The applicant shall offer access to P.G. & E. for its site from the inte-
rior roadway as shown on the tentative map.
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN RESTRICTIONS
15. Lots over 10,000 square feet in area shall comply with the R-10 zoning
district for allowed use, structure height, number of stories, and minimum
setback requirements. Each lot shall provide for a minimum two off-street
parking spaces.
I -
A 20-foot setback shall be observed from the face of curb .or, if there is a
sidewalk, then from the back of the sidewalk. No two-story elements facing
the curb shall be allowed in locations where less than the standard front
yard setback is authorized. The secondary front setback shall be a minimum
of 15 feet. �A minimum 3-foot clear, level sideyard shall be provided.
The minimum reasonable pad depth shall be 80 feet so as to provide for a
functional rear yard. A minimum 30 feet by 10 feet, clear, level ,
8
}
rectangular rearyard shall be provided. - This rectangular area shall not be
supported by retaining walls. -
16. Unless otherwise specified below, lots under 10,000 square feet in area
shall be governed by the R-6 zoning district with respect to allowed use,
structure height, .number of stories and minimum setback requirements. Each
lot shall protide for a minimum two off-street parking spaces.
The.j.minimum front yard setback shall be 20 feet from the face to curb or,
if there is a sidewalk, then from the back of the sidewalk. For a
side-entry garage, the minimum front yard setback shall be 6 feet from
behind the sidewalk or 10 feet from the face of curb, whichever provides
the greater setback. No two-story elements facing the curb shall be
allowed in locations where less than the standard front yard setback is
authorized.
Maximum 4-foot tall criblock or other decorative retaining wall shall be
required for any sideyard slope 5 feet tall or taller in vertical height.
A minimum 3-foot clear, level sideyard shall be provided.
The minimum reasonable pad depth shall be 80 feet so as to provide for a
functional rear yard. A minimum 10-foot by 20-foot, level , clear,
rectangular rearyard shall be provided. This rectangular area shall not be
supported by retaining walls.
17. The Zoning Administrator shall review and approve the individual site
plans, landscaping, design and architecture. Special consideration shall
be given to .rear elevations facing south and east in order to mitigate
visual impacts (the architectural design shall be similar to a front
elevation under such circumstances) .
Special architectural/landscape treatment and review of lot 136 is required
prior to issuance of a building permit. The residence on this lot should
serve as a design element for the project and contribute to the community
identity. Perimeter fencing shall be limited to open, wrought iron
fencing. In addition to review of the standard construction drawings, a
perspective of the proposed development shall be provided as viewed from
the access road near lot 93.
Except for Lot 157, a minimum 15-foot (rear or sideyard, as appropriate)
setback shalllbe observed for all reside'ntial structures along the
perimeter of the Bettencourt Ranch property. If lot 157 is retained, a 10
foot minimum setback from the Tassajara Estates property shall be observed.
SPECIAL LOT CONSIDERATIONS
18. Lots 233, 234, 263 through 265, 432 through 436 and 419 through 422 shall
be restricted! to single-story houses. Lots 424 shall be restricted to
single-story profile. Special landscape treatment (e.g. , 24" box trees)
shall be provided on lots 136, 263, 264 and 265.
9
}
19. the houses on: Lots._425 through,,431 shall be restricted so that they face
the private road.
20. Subject to Zoning Administrator approval , four residential units may be
constructed for model/display purposes. At least one of the residences
shall be equipped with an interior sprinkler system in compliance with the
Fire District requirements, and one shall be landscaped in accord with the
County policies on drought-tolerant plants.
GEOTECHNICAL' REQUIREMENTS
21. Slide materials shall be excavated, recompacted with engineered fill ,
returned to aInatural appearing contour and hydroseeded. Slide corrective
measures shall be approved by the Zoning Administrator following review by
the County Planning Geologist. The County shall submit to the Town of
Danville the proposed slide corrective measures and the final grading plan
for review and comment prior to its approval .
22. Submit a revised tentative map showing the development layout on a land-
slide map. Landslide scarps shall be included with the deposits.
23. Submit additional geology, soil , and foundation information outlined in the
Planning Geologist memos dated October 24, 1988 and November 15, 1988 for
technical review and approval . Recommendations shall include recommenda-
tions for retaining wall backfill which will support landscape vegetation
while providing satisfactory drainage.
24. At least 60 drays prior to recording a Final Map, issuance of a grading
permit, or installation of improvements, submit 4 copies of a Preliminary
Geologic and Soil report incorporating all reports submitted for this
development under one date and cover letter for review and approval of the
Zoning Admini'strator. Concurrently with recordation of a Final Map, record
a statement to run with deeds to the parcels of this property acknowledging
'the Preliminary Geologic and Soil Report by title, author (firm) , and date,
calling attention to approved recommendations, and noting that the report
is on file for public review in the Community Development Department of
Contra Costa County.
25. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the developer shall enter into a
consultant services agreement with the. permitting agency to provide
geotechnical preview of design, and of construction inspection. The
developer shall deposit half of funds estimated by consultant to cover
review costsprior to issuance of grading permits and remainder of actual
costs prior to issuance of any building permit.
26. Prior to issuance of Building permits on parcels of this subdivision,
submit to the Building Inspection and Community Development Department, or
Danville Planning Department, as-graded reports of the engineering geolo-
gist and the ,geotechnical engineer with a map showing final plan and grades
for subsurface drainage, subdrain cleanouts, disposal and pickup points,
and buttress (fills with their keyway and shear keys locations, retaining
10
r
walls installed, and other=soil improvements installed during grading, all
as surveyed by a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer. An as-graded
geologic map shall be compiled during grading and submitted with the final
reports on griding. ;
27. A Grading bond is required for the work necessary to carry out the recom-
mendations of �the Preliminary Geologic and Soil Report. Provide sufficient
subsurface information to estimate the cost of required soil improvements.
PARK DEDICATION FEES
28. Prior to filing a Final Map, the applicant shall contribute $1,670 per lot
in park land dedication fees. The applicant may receive credit against
this requirement for the cost of on-site recreational facilities in accord
with Chapter 920-8 of the Subdivision Code.
Prior to making its decision on whether or not the applicant may receive
credit for the cost of on-site recreational facilities, the Zoning
Administrator shall submit the credit request and its tentative decision to
the Town of Danville for review and comment.
The collected fees shall be used for improvements to the planned community
park facility in the Tassajara Ranch project.
STREET NAMES
29. Street names Ishall be subject to the review and approval of the Community
Development Department. The proposed names shall be submitted to the
Graphics Section at least 30 days prior to filing a Final Map.
CHILD CARE/PARCEL B
30. No development shall occur on Parcel B prior to the approval of a Final
Development Plan application. Development for this site is restricted to
noncommercial uses (e.g. , child care) which support and are of compatible
intensity wih the adjacent residential uses in the area.
31. Prior to filing a final map, the applicant shall submit a demand study for
child care facilities generated from the future project residents and an
appropriate response program in accord with Ordinance 88-1, the Child Care
Ordinance. The response program shall be subject to final review and
approval of the Zoning Administrator.
The response program shall be in operation prior to occupancy of residen-
tial units. If the Zoning Administrator review concludes that an on-site
facility is needed, that facility will either be located in the proposed
clubhouse area, or a special child care facility will be sited on Parcel B.
11
-r
CONSTRUCTION NOISE,. DUST. AND LITTER CONTROL
32. Noise. generating construction activities shall be limited to the hours of
7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday, and shall be prohibited on
state and Federal holidays. The restrictions on allowed working days may
be modified on prior written approval by the Zoning Administrator.
33. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to
fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good
condition and to locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air
compressors and concrete pumpers as far away from existing residences as
possible.
34. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall
post the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the
exterior boundary of the project site and to the homeowners associations of
nearby residential projects that construction work will commence. The
notice shall include a list of contact persons with name, title, phone
number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for maintaining
the list shall be included. The list shall be kept current at all times
and shall consist of persons with authority to initiate corrective action
in their area of responsibility. The names of individuals responsible for
noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the notice. The
notice shall be re-issued with each phase of major grading activity.
A copy of the notice shall be transmitted to the Community Development
Department. the notice shall be accompanied by a list of the names and
addresses of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area
noticed.
35. An acceptable erosion control and revegetation plan shall be submitted to
the Building Inspection Department.
36. A dust and litter control program shall be submitted for the review and
approval of thle Zoning Administrator following review by the Building
Inspection Depiartment. Dust shall be kept down by watering which shall be
accomplished by a watering truck on site or from hydrants on site. Any
violation of the approved program or applicable ordinances shall require- an
immediate work stoppage. Construction work shall not be allowed to resume
until , if necessary, an appropriate construction bond has been posted.
ROAD, DRAINAGE AND UTILITY REQUIREMENTS
37. 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. Conformance with the
Ordinance Code includes the following requirements:
12
1) Constructing road improvements along a realigned of Camino
Tassajara as follows: ,
a. Construction shall occur along the alignment shown on --the
County Public Works Department drawings PA4721C-Sheets 8 and
9, except that the right of way shall be 128 feet rather
than the 100 feet as shown. Adjustments shall be subject to
the review and approval of the County Public Works Depart-
ment.
b. Construct curbs (face of curbs located 15 feet from the
widened right of way line) , 8 foot meandering pedestrian and
bike pathway, necessary longitudinal and transverse drain-
age, 36-foot wide roadways, a raised half-width median
strip, and necessary standard transitions at both ends of
the development along the northerly side of a realigned
Camino Tassajara. Provide a planter strip, having a minimum
width of 2 feet, between the curb and pathway. That portion
of the pathway not located within the right of way shall be
located within a public access and utility easement. The
pathway shall be free of obstructions and shall have 2 feet
of clearance, at least, from obstructions on both sides.
Slight adjustments to the cross-section described above
shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning
Administrator following referral to the Town of Danville and
Public Works Department.
C. Provide full channelized median openings with left-turn
storage lanes and standard transitions, at the intersections
of the entrance roads with Camino Tassajara by widening into
the median area. See Condition of Approval I . below.
d. Landscape the border strip (sidewalk area) and median, sub-
ject to approval by the Zoning Administrator:
(1) Design the irrigation system so that irrigation water
will not spray or flood onto the pavement surface of
the roadway; and
(2) Establish a landscape maintenance entity subject to
approval of the Public Works Department.
e. Coordinate the installation and frontage improvements so as
to cause minimum inconvenience to the public to include the
following:
(1) Prior to construction, submit a detailed plan, to the
Public Works Department, showing improvements to be
constructed, conforms with existing and/or adjacent
improvements, pavement striping details, and staging
plans.
13
(2)- Paving of all .,de:tours. Any exceptions will =.be subject
to review and approval of the Public Works Department.
(3) : Limiting unavoidable delays to the public due to con-
struction operation -to no more than five (5) .minutes.
(4) Public roadways shall be kept free of mud and debris.
f. Execute a deferred improvements agreement to pay for 50% of
the cost of the design and construction of the traffic
signal and interconnect at the intersection of the westerly
access road and Camino Tassajara and 100% of the cost of the
design of the traffic signal and interconnect at the
intersection of the easterly access road/Leema Drive and
Camino Tassajara. The developer shall be reimbursed for up
to 50% of the cost of the easterly traffic signal by
developments as they occur south of the intersection in the
Leema Drive area, on a prorata basis.
g. Constructing, if required by the transit authority, a stan-
dard concrete bus turnout at a location subject to review
and approval by the transit authority and providing public
utility easements as necessary for the turnout and accesso-
ries.
2) Constructing paved turnarounds at the ends of the proposed pri-
vate roads.
3) Und,ergrounding of all utility distribution facilities.
-4) Coniveying all storm waters to an existing adequate storm drainage
fai l i ty.
5) Installing street lights on Camino Tassajara and applying for
annexation to County Service Area L-100 for maintenance of the
street lights. The final number and location of the lights will
be determined by the County Traffic Engineer.
6) If the creek is left in a natural state, the developer' s engineer
must verify the creek's capacity, considering appropriate
freeboard, and improve the creek's capacity as necessary. The
creek's resistance to erosion shall also be determined, based on
a soils report; and bank protection, based on a registered soils
engineer's recommendations, shall be provided.
7) Submitting a Final Map prepared by a registered civil engineer or
licensed land surveyor.
8) Submitting improvement plans prepared by a registered civil en-
gineer, payment of review and inspection fees, and security for
all improvements required by the Ordinance Code or the conditions
of approval for this subdivision. These plans shall include any
14
necessary traffic signage and striping. plans for review- by. the
County ty Traffic Engineer.
B. Convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, additional right, of way
for the widening and realignment of Camino Tassajara. The planned
width of Camino Tassajara is 128 feet.
C. Relinquish abutter's rights of access along Camino Tassajara, with the
exception of the access roads as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map.
An exception is also permitted for construction access during the
construction of the P.G.& E. station.
D. 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 per-
manent, lroad and drainage improvements.
E. Comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 101A as
adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
F. Mitigate the off-site traffic impact of this development by complying
with the requirements of the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement re-
lated ti the Tassajara Area Transportation Improvement Fees.
G. This development is subject to road improvement and drainage area fees
(Conditions of Approval E and F above) . Certain improvements required
by these Conditions of Approval or the County Subdivision Ordinance
Code may be eligible for credit or .reimbursement against said fees.
The developer should contact the County Public Works Department to
determine the extent of any credit or reimbursement for which he might
be eligible.
H. The on-site road system shall be constructed to County private road
standards with cross sections as shown on the Vesting Tentative Map.
All street intersections shall intersect as nearly as possible at
right angles and be configured to ensure adequate sight distance. The
28-foot wide minor streets (lotted one side) shall be signed for no
parking on the lotted side.
I. Provide a traffic engineer evaluation of the requirements for median
openings, storage lanes, and traffic signals at the intersections of
the access roads and Camino Tassajara.
J. Prior do issuance of building permits, file the Final Map for Subdi-
vision 7188.
ADVISORY NOTE
This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish &
Game. The applicant should notify the Department of Fish & Game, P.O. Box 47,
Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction within this
15
development that:may:;affect. any fish and wildlife-.resources, per the 4ish &Game
Code. ,
This project may also be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps of
Engineers.'The applicant should notify the appropriate district of the-Corps of
Engineers to determine if a permit is required and if it can be obtained.
THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A REQUIREMENT OF THIS PERMIT. THIS
INFORMATION IS PROVIDED TO ADVISE YOU OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER AGENCIES.
1. Comply with the requirements of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection
District as identified in the District's September 15, 1988 letter.
RHD:gms
wrl:Bettenct.CoA
10/31/88
11/16/88/vpl
11/21/88/vpl
Revised 12/7/88
16