HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10101989 - T.4 r� Yti
T. 4
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on October 10, 1989 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisor Powers,Schroder, McPeak and Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Fanden
ABSTAIN: None
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Appeal By ARTEK, Inc. On Subdivision 7233 In The
Walnut Creek/Saranap Area.
This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by ARTEK, Inc. from the decision
of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission on the application
filed by ARTEK, Inc. (applicant/owner) for tentative subdivision map
approval to subdivide 2. 9 acres of land into seven lots (Subdivision
7233 ) in the Walnut Creek/Saranap area.
Mary Fleming, Community Development Department, presented
background on the site and on the proposal for the site. She
commented that staff had reviewed the proposal and gone to the
Planning Commission with a recommendation that included an initial
study that recommended for a negative declaration. She commented on
the Planning Commission taking testimony and before they actually
heard the project, they determined that an Environmental Impact Report
should be completed for this project with some of the concerns that
they expressed being the steepness of the site, the soil instability,
the architectural design and drainage. That decision is what is now
being appeal by Mr. Patmont. She commented on the staff
recommendation that the Board deny the appeal and sustain the decision
of the Planning Commission in requiring an EIR and that staff be
directed to prepare and EIR and require the applicant to pay the fees
for the EIR.
The public hearing was opened and the following people appeared
to speak:
Edward Patmont, President of ARTEK, Inc. , 2231-A Commerce Avenue,
Concord, spoke in opposition to requiring an EIR, addressing various
concerns including soils, visual impact, and drainage. He presented
letters from two adjacent neighbors.
Patricia Jensen, 131 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, commented in
favor of requiring an Environmental Impact Report.
Rick Lafferty, 168 Lowell Drive, Danville, spoke in favor of
ARTEK, Inc and requested the Board not require an EIR of Mr. Patmont.
Dal Leite, 77 Willow Avenue, Walnut Creek, spoke on his lack of
trust of ARTEK, Inc.
Mike Miller, 1842 Poplar Drive, Walnut Creek, spoke in support -of
requirement of an EIR.
Roy Torburn, 1848 Poplar Drive, Walnut Creek, spoke in support of
the EIR.
Betty Ann Wheatley Torburn, 1848 Poplar Drive, Walnut Creek,
spoke in opposition to the property and the developments.
The Chairman read into the record the comments from Emil and
Carmen Perez, 206 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, expressing
satisfactions with the promises Mr. Patmont made and concern relative
to drainage.
Susan Pereira, 245 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, expressed
concerns including landslides.
James W. Day, 130 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, spoke in favor of
the Planning Commission decision.
Jim Simmons, 245 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, expressed concerns
including height of the project, soils and drainage.
The Chairman read comments from the following persons into the
,record:
Betty Rose, 230 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, in support of
requiring the EIR.
Norm Temple, 230 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, expressing that
the EIR is necessary.
Dorothy Roberts, 141 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, requesting an
EIR.
Kathy Ellerman, 110 Sequoia Avenue, Walnut Creek, expressing
concerns including safety, drainage and liability.
Mr. Patmont spoke in rebuttal.
The public hearing was closed.
Supervisor Schroder commented that because of the conflicting
recommendation between the professional staff of the County and the
County Planning Commission, the sensitivity of the area, and because
of questions raised during the testimony today that he would like to
have some time to meet with staff and the County Geologist, have an
opportunity to view the site and recommend to the Board in his best
judgement whether an EIR would be required. Supervisor Schroder moved
to defer the decision on this matter for one week on the determination
calendar.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the decision on the appeal by
ARTEK, Inc. from the decision of the County Planning Commission on
Subdivision 7233 is DEFERRED to the October 17, 1989 Determination
Calendar.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supsors on he date shown.
ATTESTED:
PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of th4 Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
cc: Community Development By
° ,beauty
County Counsel