Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
MINUTES - 12041990 - 2.4
2.4 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on ,December 4, 1990_, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBJECT: Clayton Valley Farms Project Land Use Permit 2071-87 The Board received the report of the County Administrator on the investigation of allegations of non-compliance with conditions of approval for Land Use Permit No. 2071-87 for the Clayton Valley Farms Project. A copy of the report and the recommendations contained therein are attached and included as a part of this document. John Gregory of the County Administrator's Office advised that Clayton Farms raises horses and installed a horse conditioning track in a pasture/meadow area of the farm, and that Save Mt. Diablo raised objections to the utilization of this area for that purpose. Mr. Gregory noted that an oral agreement relative to this land use appears to be the problem as to whether to keep the area as it is or as a meadow. He advised of concerns raised that the subject site may be used as a staging area and a possible parking lot. Supervisor Torlakson expressed appreciation to Mr. Gregory for his work in investigating this matter. He expressed concern as to whether LUP 2071-87 allows for the construction of a horse conditioning track and of his belief that there should be a public process to determine whether such a facility should be allowed. He noted that the area in question is very sensitive because of its proximity to the Mt. Diablo State Park. Chris Platt, owner of Clayton Valley Farms, advised that his farm encompasses approximately 600 acres of land dedicated primari- ly to raising horses and that the track was built for the purpose of exercising his horses. He noted that Save Mt. Diablo wants this area restored to its original state so that it can be used as a parking lot. He expressed his cooperation in working with County staff in the development of his Project and in seeking compliance with County regulations and efforts to alleviate the concerns of his neighbors. He called attention to the fact that the area in question is private land and that he perceives no conflict with the construction of the track as an inappropriate land use given the zoning requirement for the land. Patricia Curtin, attorney representing Clayton Valley Farms, Law Firm of Gagen, McCoy, McMahon and Armstrong, 279 Front Street, Danville, stated that the horse training track is not a violation of the Conditions of Approval for LUP 2071-87, does not violate the scenic easement restrictions, and is consistent with A-2 zoning requirements. In referring to the County Administrator's recommen- dations on the attachment, Ms. Curtin advised that her client would not have any problems with recommendations Nos. 2a, c, d, e, and f, but advised of objections to recommendations Nos. 2b and g. She commented on the possibility of the Board approving Recommendation No. 2g providing for the establishment of an Ad Hoc Committee and recommended that the Committee's review be limited to specific issues so that all parties are aware of what is under considera- tion. She further requested that the due date for the Committee's report be advanced from February 5 to January 15, 1991. Leslie LaFond, 4145 Morgan Territory Road, Clayton, spoke in opposition to the track and of possible violations to Land Use Permit 2071-87. She expressed concern that grading material and water runoff will discharge into, the creek and cause property damage as a result of flooding. If the water flow in the creek is restricted, she noted that during the dry season there could be a problem with stagnant water. Gehn Farlow, 2575 Morgan Territory Road, Clayton, spoke in support of the Clayton Farms track and expressed his belief of its appropriateness with a horse raising business. He advised that he believes an individual should be allowed to develop his property without outside interference as long as he complies with the laws and regulations of affected public agencies. Heidi Sommer, a horse trainer, 5191 Morgan Territory Road, Clayton, spoke about training procedures and a controlled environ- ment required for conditioning horses on land that is safe for their legs. Bob Walker, Save Mount Diablo, 545 Clayton, Street, San Francisco 94117, spoke in opposition to the track and urged the Board to require Clayton Valley Farms to file an amended land use permit as well as complete an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) . Seth Adams, Program Director, Save Mt. Diablo, P. O. Box 44, Martinez 94553, further commented on his group's opposition to the track and urged the Board to require that the meadow be restored to its original state He reiterated the need for an amended land use permit and an EIR. Dorothy Lovato, 4181 Leon Drive, Clayton, advised that she is a neighbor of Clayton Valley Farms and spoke in favor of the track. John Marvin, 220 Tumbleweed Court, Clayton, advised of his concerns relative to the track and gave his reasons for his opposi- tion. Jim La Fond, 4145 Morgan Territory Road, Clayton, commented on the difficulty in doing a compaction test at this time on the subject site. He expressed concern with the reference to the agricultural pond on .the subject site and likened it to a lake because of its dimensions being 700 feet long, 400 feet wide, and 8 feet deep. He commented on the amount of runoff that will collect in the pond during the rainy season and problems that could occur if it exceeds its storage capacity. W. G. Morgan, 6040 Morgan Territory Road, Clayton, spoke in support of Clayton Valley Farms and proposed that there is a move underway to target certain agricultural property for subsequent acquisition by Mt. Diablo State Park. Irma Sevin, 197 Hilltop Crescent, Walnut Creek, spoke in support of Clayton Valley Farms. All persons desiring to speak were heard. Speaking in rebuttal, Mr. Platt commented on the allegations made and the support he has received from people living in the area on this project. He expressed his belief to be in compliance with County regulations and spoke of his contact with representatives of the State Department of Fish and Game who encouraged him to pro- ceed. Ms. Curtin advised that the track is consistent with the land use permit. She commented on the need to focus on the Conditions of Approval and not on the allegations made by the Save Mt. Diablo organization. In response to a question of Supervisor Torlakson, Phil Harrington, Public Works engineer, advised of the difficulty and cost involved in determining that proper engineering practises have been followed in the grading for the horse training track. He noted that the slope of the fill is relatively steep and that there could be a possibility that the flood control easement may not have been done properly. He advised that this would require further review. Board members referred to the issues that require further clarification from County Counsel. There was consensus among Board members to defer decision on this matter. Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that decision on this matter is DEFERRED to December 18, 1990, for consideration under the Determation Item section of the Agenda. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that County Counsel, the County Administrator, and staff of the Community Development and Public Works departments are REQUESTED to review and report to the Board on the issues raised here today. 1 hereby certify that this It a true ttnd correct DOPY°t an action taken and entered On the minutes of the Boats of Supervisors°n the dam sho*n. ?-,,i ATTESTED: PHIL BATCHELOR.Clerk of the Board cc: County Counsel ofSape^ao°rsand Cou°bAdminlatrator County Administrator % Community Development By Public Works i TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS. ? s Contra FROM: Phil Batchelor f .1 Costa by John T. Gregory s l County DATE: December 3, 1990 ?sra_on SUBJECT: INVESTIGATION OF APPROPRIATE COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF LAND USE PERMIT 2071-87 FOR CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS PROJECT SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Accept this report from the County Administrator on conditions of approval related to the land use permit for the Clayton Valley Farms Project. 2. Consider actions related to the investigation which would: a. Request as a good faith effort Clayton Valley Farms conduct no further activity in or around the horse exercise and conditioning track until agreement is reached on a plan of action to appropriately mitigate concerns expressed by parties involved in this matter. b. Request that Clayton Valley Farms file an amended land use permit by December 21, 1990 to establish the horse exercise and conditioning track. C. Request that Clayton Valley Farms file with the Grading Division of the Building Inspection Department an up-dated Grading Permit (GN-165590) to show: - A new grading plan showing the "as built" grading and the location of the creek. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:YQr,__YES SIGNATURE: -RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR -RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE _OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON ngramhar d r 19()O APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED- OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS IH BY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE -UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CO CT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN _ AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS O E DATE SHOWN. CC: County Admin* rator ATTESTED Community v., Zoning Admin. PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK O EBOARD OF Buildi nspection, Grading SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADM TRATOR Publ' Wks, Flood Control C my Counsel BY PUTY M382 0/BB) New cost and earth volumes for existing permit. Erosion control plan for approval. d. Request that Clayton Valley Farms consent as part of the up-dated Grading Permit to submit an application for a supervised grading permit. e. Request that Clayton Valley Farms provide documentation to the satisfaction of the Building Inspection Grading Division and Flood Control District of Public Works that all concerns about possible drainage problems through and around the property have been mitigated. f. That representatives of Clayton Valley Farms provide documentation from the Department of Fish and Game that no violations exist regarding the setback of the horse exercise and conditioning track. g. Direct that in lieu of amended land use permit application, an ad hoc committee chaired by the deputy director for current planning/land development in Community Development, be established for the next 60 days and consist of appropriate county staff from the Community Development, Public Works and Building Inspection Departments, representatives from Clayton Valley Farms, two community residents, a representative from Save Mt. Diablo and the Department of Fish and Game to draft an agreement on the mitigation of concerns on this matter. Such agreement to be presented for Board of Supervisors review by its February 5, 1991 meeting. FISCAL IMPACT None. BACKGROUND On September 25, 1990, the Board of Supervisors acting in part as a response to objections raised by Save Mt. Diablo in a September 7, 1990 request that the County Administrator's office in conjunction with the Community Development and Building Inspection Departments conduct an investigation of alleged violations of conditions for the Clayton Valley Farms Project development. The investigation came after a land use permit for Clayton Valley Farms Project was approved by the County Zoning Administrator. This project consists of a 9 unit subdivision (Subdivision Permit No. 7023 and horse conditioning and breeding facility for Arabian horses (Land Use Permit No. 2071-87) . The property is located in an A-2 Agricultural Zone and uses permitted for this particular matter are as follows: (1) "All types of agriculture, including general farming, horticulture, floriculture, nurseries and greenhouses, mushrooms rooms, dairying, livestock production, fur farms, poultry raising, animal breeding, aviaries, apiaries, foresting and similar agricultural uses." The initial approval of the project was appealed by Save Mt. Diablo. Subsequently discussion between the Planning Commission, Save Mt. Diablo and various area residents resulted in an agreement which appeared to resolve the concerns of all parties. Paramount to this agreement was retainment of a meadow area as open space. This is one of the ultimate questions in this matter. Within this meadow area grading has occurred in the amounts of 20,000 cubic yards of cut and 20,000 cubic yards of fill costing $36,000. This is more than double what the initial grading permit application had called for. However, an amended grading permit was granted by Building Inspection which made allowance for the new figures. It has been asserted that this cut and fill which resulted in a horse conditioning facility would not be permitted by the language of the Land Use Permit and.or Subdivision Approval. No specific reference exists in the conditions of approval to include the location and activity for a horse conditioning facility. The conditions do state that the permit is approved to establish breeding and conditioning facilities for race horses. The question was raised does the present breeding and conditioning facility exceed the scope envisioned by County staff. Due to this question, county staff have made several site visits to the area. Additionally, the Department of Fish and Game has voiced concerns about the viability of the course of the Marsh Creek which is in the area. These concerns also center around whether the cut and fill material provide a hazard to the creek's natural discharge of water and exceed the scope of a project initially approved by the Zoning Administrator. In view of the aforementioned concerns, possible concessions expressed by Clayton valley Farms would include the following actions to: - Screen the horse conditioning track from Morgan Territory Road with native trees and vegetation. - Hydroseed the area with drought-resistant meadow flowers. - Placement of a pond in a portion of land within the middle of the horse track. - Add additional landscaping in order to place the training facility in as aesthetically pleasing placement in the community. These concessions if performed in connection with the ad hoc committee's review could possibly provide an agreeable resolution of this matter. CONCLUSION This investigation concludes that the cut and fill in its present state is an expansion beyond what the scope of a facility that would have been approved given objections by concerned parties in this matter. Furthermore, upon site visits by county staff, it appears that the grading for the horse training facility has deposited material if not falling into the creek, is in close enough proximity to warrant concern about the impact of any increased water flow through the area and the resulting flood potential. It would seem that although the meadow has been altered, measures are available to make the location, size and appearance of the horse track acceptable to concerned parties in the area. If the Board is unwilling to accept the idea the the present horse graining facility is consistent with the language of the conditions of approval and the A-2 zoning for the area in which the track is placed, then the Board should request submission of an Amended Land Use Permit. This area is part of a scenic easement. As an alternative, the Board can ask that the ad hoc committee be used to secure reasonable accommodation to concerns about the meadow, creek and the track proper aesthetic placement in the surrounding community's physical environment. It is hoped that these comments offer this Board information to arrive at a decision amicable to those involved in the development and review of the Clayton Valley Farms Project. LAW OFFICES OF GAGEN, MCCOY, MCMAHON & ARMSTPONG WILLIAM E. GAGEN, JR, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION VICTOR J. CONTI GREGORY L. MCCOY 279 FRONT STREET KAREN MATCKE CROSBY PATRICK J. MCMAHON P. O. BOX 218 PATRICIA E. CORTIN MARK L. ARMSTRONG BARBARA DUVAL JEWELL LINN K. COOMBS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 94526-0218 CAROLE A. LAW STEPHEN W. THOMAS ALLAN C. MOORE CHARLES A. KOSS DENISE ASPER OLSFN MICHAEL J. MARKOWITZ TELEPHONE (415) 837-0565 ALEXANDER L. SCHMID MICHAEL W. CARTER FAX (4151 838-5985 EVELYN SPIROU RICHARD C. RAINES OF COUNSEL JOHN S. CLAUSEN yM�, _ REC December 3, 1990 DEC - 71990 HAND-DELIVERED CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA CO. m To: Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Chairperson Nancy C. Fanden Supervisor Tom Powers Supervisor Robert I. Schroder Supervisor Sunne W. McPeak Supervisor Tom Torlakson From: Patricia E. Curtin Re: Clayton Valley Farms Board of Supervisors Meeting - December 4, 1990 I. INTRODUCTION ' On December 4, 1990, the County Administrator will report its findings to the Board on the investigation it conducted on the alleged violations of the conditions of approval for the Clayton Valley Farms project (Supplemental Board Agenda, Determination Item 2.4) . The alleged violations were been raised by Save Mt. Diablo by way of letter dated September 7, 1990. Its objections were raised immediately following the grading of a horse conditioning track in the pasture area of the Farm. We prepared specific responses to each and every allegation raised by Save Mt. Diablo. A copy of our responses, in addition to other documents, including �I Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 2 a list of signatures of approximately 100 neighbors in support of our project, was hand-delivered to your offices on October 30, 1990. This packet of information is dated October 30. It is our understanding that Save Mt. Diablo's main objection is with the grading of the horse conditioning track. Save Mt. Diablo would prefer to have a staging area and trail easements on this portion of the Farm as requested in its letter dated September 7, 1990, on page 8 in measure 25. Save Mt. Diablo asserts that we have violated the conditions of approval rendered on the Land Use Permit (attached as Exhibit 010) and Subdivision (attached as Exhibit 02") by creating this track. It is our position, as shall be demonstrated herein, that the placement of the horse conditioning track is not a violation of any conditions contained in the Land Use Permit or Subdivision. II. BACKGROUND In an effort to provide you with a complete understanding of the issues at hand, the following background information is provided. Portions of this information appear in the earlier distributed packet of information dated October 30. We feel it is essential to again summarize that information and inform you of the important events that have occurred since October 30. On April 22, 1988, the Contra Costa County Planning Commission unanimously approved the Clayton Valley Farms project. This project consists of a nine-unit Subdivision and breeding and conditioning facilities for Arabian horses as permitted by the Land Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 3 Use Permit. Throughout the approval process, my clients worked hand-in-hand with the Planning Commissioners, Save Mt. Diablo and various neighbors. As part of the project, my clients placed 500 acres (out of 580 acres) in "Scenic Easement". On August 6, 1990, the Zoning Administrator approved our plans for a horse conditioning track (see Exhibit "G" attached to Exhibit "3") . A grading permit was thereafter issued (see Exhibit "A" attached to Exhibit 11311) and acted upon by my clients in good faith. On October 2, 1990, after the grading was complete, my clients received a telephone call from Mr. Karl Wandry asking that they cease all grading operations in view of the complaints made by a few complaining neighbors. My clients agreed to comply with Mr. Wandry's request. Subsequent work was conducted on the track for erosion control purposes only and at the direction of Mr. Gordon Whisler, Grading Engineer for the Building Inspection Department. On September 25, 1990, your Board requested that the County Administrator's office conduct and coordinate with Community Development and Building Inspection Departments an investigation of the alleged violations on conditions of approval for the project. On November 6, 1990, the Board, by a 4-1 vote, accepted the subdivision improvements as complete. This decision was favorably made despite the fact Save Mt. Diablo requested that the decision be delayed until the investigation was complete. As presented that Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 4 hearing, its complaints relate to the activities under the Land Use Permit as opposed to the Subdivision. On November 16, 1990, this office received a copy of a letter dated November 9 from Mr. Wandry addressed to Mr. Christopher Platt (Farm Manager) . This letter stated that it was necessary to amend the Land Use Permit to address the amount of grading on the horse conditioning track. On November 21, 1990, this office received a copy of a similar letter dated November 19 from Mr. John Gregory. These letters, as well as a newspaper article that appeared in the Contra Costa Times on November 21, 1990, improperly asserted that my clients graded $70, 000.00 to $100, 000.00 worth of earth. The fact is that my clients only graded $36,000.00 worth of earth. It is true that the initial Grading Permit was issued for $16,000.00 worth of earth. Immediately after learning that we exceeded the grading amount, we amended the Grading Permit and paid a supplemental fee of $990.00 (see Exhibit "C" attached to Exhibit "3") . On November 27, 1990, in response to the letters from Mr. Wandry and Mr. Gregory, Mr. Platt and I met with Mr. Gregory, Mr. . Wandry and other County officials to discuss the contents of the letters. Mr. Seth Adams and Mr. Bob Walker of Save Mt. Diablo were also present. At this meeting, we distributed a memorandum dated November 26, 1990 addressed to Mr. Gregory outlining and responding to each allegation contained in the letters. A copy of that memorandum is attached for your review as Exhibit 03". Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 5 At our meeting on November 27, 1990, concerns were expressed that a portion of the horse conditioning track was within the creek drainage easement area which my clients dedicated to the County. However, the Grading Plan demonstrates that the track is not within this easement (see Exhibit "E" attached to Exhibit 113") . To satisfy the concern expressed, we agreed to "stake out" the track and its proximity to the creek drainage easement. On November 28, 1990, Mr. Jim Schuricht (Engineer for the project) , in the presence of Ms. Natalie Griffith (Building Inspection, Grading) and Phil Harrington (Public Works, Flood Control) , staked the track. This staking process unequivocally demonstrated that the track is approximately 10 feet away (at the closest point) from the edge of the creek drainage easement. III. LEGALITY OF THE HORSE CONDITIONING TRACK The real issue to be decided is whether the horse conditioning track violates the conditions of approval in the Land Use Permit and/or Subdivision. As earlier stated, the track is consistent with the Permit and the Subdivision. Moreover, the track is consistent with the underlying A-2 zoning and does not violate any agreements allegedly made with Save Mt. Diablo and a few neighbors. A. Conditions of Approval for the Land Use Permit and Subdivision We concede that the Land Use Permit and Subdivision do not specifically state that a horse conditioning track will be Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 31, 1990 Page 6 constructed in a particular area. However, the construction of such a track is implicit in the terms and conditions of the Permit and Subdivision. 1. Land Use Permit There are several references and/or conditions in the Permit that demonstrate that a horse conditioning track was contemplated thereunder. Several examples are demonstrated below: a. The face of the Permit specifically states that the Permit is being issued for the "EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING HORSE TRAINING FACILITY TO INCLUDE A YOUTH TRAINING APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM AND TO HAVE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR EMPLOYEES AND TRAINERS." A horse training facility includes an area in which to train and condition horses. Moreover, after the Land Use Permit was approved, a roughly graded exercise track was created in this pasture and has been used to condition horses for over two years. b. Condition No. 2 states that "the Permit is approved to establish breeding and conditioning facilities for race horses. . ." Once again, a horse conditioning track is a conditioning facility. C. Save Mt. Diablo is of the position that we should have been required to go through the administrative review process and public hearings before receiving approval to grade the track. The Permit, however, does not support that position as evidenced by Condition No. 4. Condition No. 4 provides that the "design of horse facilities, residential buildings, accessory buildings, and other structures shall be. . .subject to administrative review and Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 7 approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of a building permit.„ (Emphasis added) . This Condition does not apply to the horse conditioning track, since it is not a structure that requires a building permit. This Condition only applies to structures and buildings that require building permits. However, it is important to note that we did obtain the approval of the Zoning Administrator prior to grading the track. 2. Subdivision The Subdivision also contemplates the creation of a horse conditioning track. For example, Condition No. 9 states that „recreational facilities, small agricultural or animal buildings or structures may be approved in designated scenic easement areas by the Zoning Administrator." The Zoning Administrator approved the horse conditioning track which is a "recreational facility." B. Scenic Easement The horse conditioning track is located in the "Scenic Easement" portion of the Farm. As part of the Subdivision, my clients dedicated this portion of their property to the County. There has been some discussion that the horse conditioning track may not be a proper use in this easement area. As demonstrated by the following, the horse conditioning track is a permitted use in the scenic easement area. Condition No. 7 of the Subdivision excepts from the Scenic Easement restrictions, "areas for the facilities and activities of the horse training operation and related residential uses, approved Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 8 under the Land Use Permit 2071-87.11 The conditioning track is part of the horse training operation approved by the Permit. Moreover, Condition No. 9 of the Subdivision allows recreational facilities, such as a horse conditioning track, in the scenic easement area if approved by the Zoning Administrator. As stated earlier, the Zoning Administrator did approve the horse conditioning track. Assuming arguendo, that the scenic easement restrictions apply to the track, the Grant Deed of Development Rights for Scenic Easement states that the County must first approve, among other activities, all improvements within the Scenic Easement area. A copy of this Grant Deed is attached hereto as Exhibit "4." The County, through its Zoning Administrator, granted such approval. C. Consistent With A-2 Zoning The pasture area where the horse conditioning track is located is zoned "A-2." Some of the permitted uses within this zone include: "[A]11 types of agriculture, including general farming, horticulture, floriculture, nurseries and livestock production, fur farms, poultry raising, animal breeding, aviaries, apiaries, forestry, and similar agricultural use." Contra Costa Code Section 84-39.402. The conditioning and breeding of horses, and thus, a conditioning track to accomplish those purposes, is an agricultural use as defined above. Accordingly, it is important to recognize Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 9 that the horse conditioning track is a permitted use in the "A-2" zone. D. Alleged Agreement to Keep the Pasture Area "As Is." Save Mt. Diablo and a few neighbors claim that an oral agreement was made wherein my clients agreed to keep the pasture area "as is." No such agreement was ever made. This position is supported by the fact that no restriction to that affect appears in the conditions of approval, or anywhere else for that matter. Save Mt. Diablo never objected until this late time, that the Conditions of Approval failed to reflect such an agreement. Save Mt. Diablo had the opportunity to voice its objections and failed to do so in a timely fashion. It is important to note that the horse conditioning track was discussed at the meetings on the project. Former Planning Commissioner Leslie Davis (Planning Commissioner at the time the project was heard and approved) acknowledged that these discussions took place during our site visit with Supervisor Tom Torlakson. IV. FILL IN CREEK The only allegation with some merit asserted by Save Mt. Diablo is the presence of a small portion of fill in the creek (which contains no water) that is adjacent to the track. . This fill fell into the creek during the grading operation. We acknowledge the presence of the fill. The amount of that fill is very small and has been expressed by the Department of Fish and Game and Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 10 Building Inspection to be "minor in nature." The fill has not caused any harm since the creek contains no water and thus, no wildlife. We have not been able to remove that fill due to the fact that we voluntarily agreed to cease all operations on the track. However, we fully intend to remove that fill as soon as we are permitted. V. MITIGATION MEASURES As stated in our memorandum dated October 30, 1990, we are f willing to implement measures to make the track a very 1 aesthetically pleasing site. To alleviate any concerns that additional fill may reach the creek, we are amenable to incorporating whatever measures are reasonably necessary to prevent that from occurring as already discussed with Natalie Griffith, Senior Grading Technician. Such measures could include the planting of willow trees as was recommended by the Department of Fish and Game. These extra measures and conditions obviously will require additional time and expense on our part, however, we feel it is important to take these extra steps to maintain a good relationship with Save Mt. Diablo, our neighbors and yourselves. VI. RIGHT TO PROCEED Pursuant to the Vested Right and Equitable Estoppel theories, we have a right to proceed with the construction and utilization of the horse conditioning track. As permitted by the vested right theory, since we have performed substantial work and incurred substantial liabilities in good faith reliance upon permits issued Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 11 by the County, we have a vested right to complete the project. (Avco Community Developers, Inc. vs. South Coast Regional Com. (1976) 17 Cal.3d 785; Billings vs. California Coastal Com. (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 729. ) As allowed by the Equitable Estoppel theory, since we acquired a promise which is implied by the Grading Permit that the horse conditioning track is a permitted use and reasonably relied on that promise to our detriment, we again have acquired a right to proceed with the project. (Santa Monica Pines, Ltd. vs. Rent Control Board (1984) 85 Cal.3d 858. ) VII. CONCLUSION As demonstrated herein, a horse conditioning track is consistent ,with the conditions of approval, and the "A-2" zoning and does not violate the Scenic Easement or any agreements allegedly made with Save Mt. Diablo or some of the neighbors. At one point in time we were asked by County staff to amend our Land Use Permit to address the "excessive" grading in the amount of $70, 000.00 to $100,000.00. As pointed out herein, the grading only amounts to $36,'000.00 and our Grading Permit was amended to reflect that amount, eliminating the need to amend the Land Use Permit. There is no reason to require us to amend our Land Use Permit to address the only legitimate concern remaining on the project which is the small amount of fill that has fallen into the creekbed. As we already stated, we shall remove that fill as soon as we are permitted and shall take the necessary steps to prevent additional fill from reaching the creek. Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors December 3, 1990 Page 12 If you have any questions or concerns on the Clayton Valley Farms project, please do not hesitate to call. PEC/ltc cc: Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board John Gregory, County Administration Karl Wandry, Community Development Byron Turner, Community Development Phil Harrington, Public Works-Flood Control Natalie Griffith, Building Inspection-Grading Diana Silver, County Counsel Christopher Platt, Clayton Valley Farms I:\c1ient\21822\sups122.mcm C- X����� 1 C' FILE COPY CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVED PERMIT APPLICANT: DeBolt Civil Engineering APPLICATION NO. 2071-87 811 San Ramon Valley Boulevard ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 080-040-041 Danville, California 94526 OWNER: John Paxton Qualtrough - ZONING DISTRICT: A-2 P. 0. Box 418 Walnut Creek, California 94596 EFFECTIVE DATE: 22 April 1988 This matter not having been appealed within the time prescribed by law, a permit for EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING.HORSE TRAINING FACILITY TO INCLUDE A YOUTH TRAINING APPREN- TICESHIP PROGRAM AND TO HAVE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL. UNITS FOR EMPLOYEES AND TRAINERS, is hereby granted, subject to the attached conditions. HARVEY E. BRAGDON, Director, Community Development Department Jean G. Mesick - Chief, Land Development Unless otherwise provided, THIS PERMIT WILL EXPIRE ONE YEAR from the effective date if th use allowed by this permit is not established within that time. PLEASE NOTE THE EFFECTIVE DATE, as no further notification will be sent by this office. cc: File :62071-87 Building Inspection Environmental Health County Assessor Flood Control Public Works - 2 Transportation Planning Eastern Fire District Dept. Parks & Recreation CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR LAND USE PERMIT 2071-87 1. This approval is based upon the site development plans submitted with the application dated received July 27, 1987, and drawings for buildings and related structures dated received December 12, 1987', together with the project description by letter dated December 1, 1987, all subject to administrative review for conformance by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of building permits for each phase of development and subject to the conditions listed below. 2. The permit is approved to establish breeding and conditioning facilities for race horses including an apprenticeship program (described in letter from the applicant dated 18, 1988) . In addition, the permit is approved to establish residence for use by the Manager, the Foreman, the Veterinarian and the property owner and also for five (5) workers' cottages at the northwest side of this property as indicated on submitted plans. The siting of the residences is subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator -in a public hearing prior to issuance of building permits. The building sites shall be planned for low-line visibility. 3. Any provision for trainee's quarters or additional worker cottages and any expansion to the approved horse facilities as established by this permit is subject to obtaining an additional land use permit at public hearing. I 4. The design of horse facilities, residential buildings, accessory buildings, and other structures shall be as indicated or generally similar to eleva- tion and perspective drawings submitted with the application by Taliesin Associated Architects, subject to administrative review and approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. All structures shall have non-flammable roofs and fire retardant or non-flammable siding. Outbuildings should be spaced 100 feet or more from residences. All gates providing vehicular access must be 12 feet or more in width. State requirements for weed abatement to be met by the property owner, including clearance of 30 feet around structures. Such clearance requirements may be extended to 100 feet by the East Diablo Fire Protection District Fire Chief where warranted. 6. Prior to issuance of building permits, the developer shall provide evidence to the Zoning Administrator from the County Health Services Department and the East Diablo Fire protection District that there is adequate water supply including that needed for fire protection. 7. Where applicable building permit plans shall provide a zone labelled "Building restriction zone-Clayton-Marsh Creek fault and landslide hazard zone". The building restriction setback zone shall extend 50 feet west of the westerly line shown on Plate 1 of the Revised Geotechnical Feasibility Study (SUB 7023) dated November 4, 1987. The building setback restriction shall apply to all structures except for occupancies meeting the. Uniform Building Code definition of Group M Occupancies, including tanks and towers. 8. At least 30 days prior to issuance of building permits, or installation of improvements or utilities, submit , a pr<eliminary geology, soils, and foundation report meeting the requirements of Subdivision Ordinance Section 94-4.420 for review and approval of the Planning Geologist. Improvement, grading, and building plans shall implement recommendations of the approved report. 9. If archaeologic materials are uncovered during grading, trenching or other on-site excavation, earthwork within 30 meters of these materials shall be stopped until an archaeologist certified by the Society for California Archaeology (SCA) .and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation measures, if they are deemed necessary. 10. All driveways and parking areas shall be paved or graveled to prevent dust and ponding of water. Other areas used by vehicular traffic, such as stor- age areas, shall also be paved or graveled to prevent dust or ponding of water. The entrance shall be paved. The final materials for the access road shall be subject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator. 11. No signs are permitted other than an identification sign subject to approval by the Zoning Administrator as to size and location, prior to installation. 12. No horse shows shall be permitted. 13. Comply with drainage, road improvement, traffic and utility requirements as follows: A. Unless exceptions are specifically granted,. this development shall conform to the requirements of Division 914 (Drainage) of the Subdivision Ordinance. B. Observe a structure setback from Marsh Creek, using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914-10, "Easements", of the Subdivision Ordinance, for all new buildings. C. Convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, 10 feet of additional right of way on Morgan Territory Road as required for the planned future half width of 30 feet. Right of way shall be based on 350 foot centerline radius curve at the curve where Morgan Territory Road changes direction from east-west to north-south. D. Obtain a Floodplain Permit for any new structures that are to be built within the flood hazard area. E. Submit improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, for review; pay the inspection, plan review and applicable lighting fees. These plans shall include any necessary traffic signage and striping plans for review by the County Traffic Engineer. The improvement plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, prior to the issuance of any building permit. The review of improvement plans and payment of all fees shall be completed Y 3i�r' 1 prior to the clearance of any building for final inspection by the Public Works Department. If final inspection is requested prior to construction of improvements, the applicant shall execute a road improvement agreement with Contra Costa County and post bonds required by the agreement to guarantee completion of the work. The following statements are not conditions of approval ; however, the applicant . should be aware of these requirements prior to filing the Final Subdivision Map or attempting to secure building permits. A. Development shall be subject to the ordinance requirements of the East Diablo Fire Protection District. See attached. B. Comply with the requirements of the Building Inspection Department. C. Comply with the requirements of the County Health Services Department. BT/aa 1/21/88 . 4/12/88 - Revised, P/C LUPXV/2071-87C.BT Ex �,b; t- r, a FILE COPS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMiUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT APPROVED PERMIT ENGINEER: DeBolt Engineering SUBDIVISION NO. 7023 811 San Ramon Valley Boulevard Danville, California 94526 ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 080-040-041 01411ER: John Paxton Qua Itrough'.`:: Z0NING DISTRICT: A-2 Post Office Box 418 Clayton, California 94517 APPROVAL DATE: August 9, 1988 This matter not having been appealed within the time prescribed b .avi, the subdivision is hereby granted, subject to the attached conditions. ° HARVEY E. BRAGDON, Director, Community Development Department By Karl :`:`Wandry. - Deputy Direct r, Community Development Departme t. PLEASE NOTE THE APPROVAL DATE, as no further notification will be sent by this office. Unless otherwise provided, you have 36 months from the approval date to file the FINAL MAP. UU LE � P .� (EDITIONS OF APPROVAL( R SUBDIVISION 7023 1. This approval is based upon the Tentative Map submitted with the applica- tion dated received August 1, 1988, labeled Alternate 111. 2. Comply with the criteria for Rural Residential Development policy adopted by the Board of Supervisors March 15, 1983, (Resolution 83/407) including criteria items H5, N6, V, and 12 attached. This will particularly relate to criteria item fi5(A) (B)(C)(D) that will require verification that wells on adjacent properties will not be substantially affected, by the additional well with this development. Documentation of verification by the County Health Department shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval prior to the filing of the Final Subdivision Map. 3. Prior to issuance of building permits, plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator, which shall include the follow- ing: A. Plans shall show proposed grading for the location of structures, driveways, drainage and shall indicate well site, water storage facil- ities including that for fire protection if appropriate and septic tank facilities with leach field location. Buildings shall be designed so as to cause a minimum of grading. B. Where significant grading is proposed, an acceptable erosion control plan shall also be provided. C. Identify trees to be removed or trees which may be endangered by pro- posed structures, or other facilities. D. Siting of proposed residences shall be reviewed for energy conserva- tion features (building site orientation and feasibility for solar facilities will be considered) . E. Consideration shall be given to having buildings with non-flammable roofs and fire retardant or non-flammable siding. F. Buildings on lot l#2 shall be located southerly of the branch of Marsh. Creek which extends across the lot, setback from Morgan Territory Road to the extent feasible near the south boundary of the lot. Landscape screening with trees shall be provided to reduce the visibility of buildings on Lot 2, from Morgan Territory Road and the Meadow area adjacent to the north. Landscape screening with trees of. buildings on Lot 4 shall also be provided. Buildings on all lots shall be located to minimize their visibility from Morgan Territory Road. G. Each residential unit shall have house numbers that are visible at all times, which may require illumination. 4. The final map shall define a zone labelled "Building restriction zone-Clayton-Marsh Creek fault and landslide hazard zone". Building re- striction zone shall extend 50 feet west of the westerly line shown on Plate 1 of the Revised Geotechnical Feasibility Study, Proposed 10-Lot Sub- division 07023) dated November 4, 1987. Building restriction shall apply to all structures except for occupancies meeting the Uniform Building Code definition of Group'M Occupancies, except tanks;: and towers. 2 5. At least 60 days prior to recording a Final Map, issuance of Building In- spection Department permits, or installation of improvements or utilities, submit a preliminary geology, soils, and foundation report meeting the re- quirements of Subdivision Ordinance Section 94-4.420 for review and approval of the Planning Geologist. Improvement, grading, and building plans shall implement recommendations of the approved report. Final Map shall cite the approved report. Record a statement to run with deeds ac- knowledging the title, date, author of the report and the November 4, '1987 feasibility report and calling attention to the conclusions and recommenda- tions of the approved reports. 6. Comply with the recommendations of the Report of Archaeological investiga- tion of the property dated January 4, 1983, of Sonoma State University, Anthropological Studies Center Cultural Resources Facility (Report #5501/1505) including that no buildings or other structures or ground dis- turbing activities such as excavations, movement of heavy equipment or ex- tensive landscaping shall take place within a 5 meter buffer zone of the site as identified in the above report, which shall be protected during construction or grading by barricade or other means. The site is located at the south boundary of the development which may affect lots #1, #3 and #4 which shall be indicated on plans for building permits. A. If avoidance of the site is not feasible, a qualified archaeologist shall make mitigation recommendations appropriate to the nature of the proposed impact. A limited archaeological testing program is often needed to evaluate a site's significance in order to determine the mitigation necessary prior to impact. Mitigation may include archaeo- logical excavation of the areas of impact or placement of a protective fill over such areas. B. Should archaeological materials be uncovered on the property during grading, trenching or other on-site excavation(s), earthwork within 30 yards of these materials shall be stopped until a professional archae- ologist who is certified by the Society for California Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest ap- propriate mitigation(s), if deemed necessary. 7. With the filing of the Final Map a scenic easement shall provided for the entire area of Lot 10, except as listed below which shall be subject to final determination by the Zoning Administrator. A reduced copy of the Tentative Map (now revised) labeled Exhibit 2 and attached hereto, indicating suggested delineation of scenic easement boundaries by Save Mount Diablo, dated received by the Community Development Department July 25, 1988, shall be used as a general guide to establish those boundaries. A. Excepting those areas for the facilities and activities of the horse training operation and related residential uses, approved under Land Use Permit 2071-87. f 3 B. Excepting the area at the northeast portion of the property in encompassing the area indicated for future expansion of Land Use Permit 2071-87. In the event this area is not utilized for this expansion after a period of 10 years of this approval , then the scenic easement shall be extended to include that area. B. The scenic easement described in above Condition #7, shall be extended to include that portion of Lot 2 northerly of the proposed east-west access road through the lot. 9. Recreational facilities, small agricultural or animal buildings or structures may be approved in the designated scenic easement areas by the Zoning Administrator. 10. Siting and design of roads crossing the meadow shall be subject to Final review and approval of the Zoning Administrator which shall minimize the impact from Morgan Territory Road. 11. An offer of dedication shall be provided for trail easements to a public agency with the precise corridor to be located on the Final Map after consultation with the East Bay Area Trails Council subject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator 12. 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. Because of the large agricultural parcels involved an exception to to the "collect and con- vey" requirement of the ordinance is permitted. B. Convey to the County of Contra Costa, by Grant Deed, the future "de- velopment rights" over that portion of the property traversed by the creek. The area for which the "development rights" are to be deeded shall be determined by using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914-10, "Easements", of the Subdivision Ordinance. C. Convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, 10 feet of additional right of way on Morgan Territory Road as required for the planned fu- ture half width of 30 feet. Right of way shall be based on 350 foot centerline radius curve at the curve where Morgan Territory Road changes direction from east-west to north-south. D. Observe an additional 80-foot setback from the widened right of way line to provide for road and slope easement needs. N 4 E. Obtain a Floodplain Permit for any new structures that are to be built within the flood hazard area. F. Submit improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, for re- view; pay the inspection, plan review and applicable lighting fees. These plans shall include any necessary traffic signage and striping plans for review by the County Traffic Engineer. The improvement plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, prior to the issuance of any building permit. The review of improvement plans and payment of all fees shall be completed prior to the clearance of- any building for final inspection by the Public Works Department. G. Submit creek crossing designs to the Flood Control District for review prior to the filing of the Final Map. These creek crossing designs, when applicable, shall accompany the issuance of building permits per- taining to this subdivision. .H. Construct the onsite roads as 20 foot wide all weather surfaced roads, constructed to County private road standards. I . Comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Countywide Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervi- sors. The following are not conditions for approval . However, you should be aware of them prior to recording the Final Map or requesting building permits. A. The East Diablo Fire Protection District. See attached. B. 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 development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish & Game Code. BT/GA/df sub8:7023c.bt 7/5/88 8/5/88 �xl�, bt LAW OFFICES OF GAGEN, MCCOY, MCMAHON & ARMSTRONG WILLIAM E. GAGEN, JR. A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION VICTOR J. CONTI GREGORY L. McCOY 279 FRONT STREET KAREN MATCKE CROSBY PATRICK J. MCMAHON P. O. BOX 218 PATRICIA E. CURTIN MARK L. ARMSTRONG BARBARA DUVAL JEWELL LINN K. COOMBS DANVILLE, CALIFORNIA 04526-0218 CAROLE A. LAW STEPHEN W. THOMAS ALLAN C. MOORE CHARLES A. KOSS DENISE ASPER OLSEN MICHAEL J. MARKOWITZ TELEPHONE (415) 837-0585 ALEXANDER L. SCHMID MICHAEL W. CARTER FAX (415) 838-5985 EVELYN SPI ROU RICHARD C. RAINES DP COUNSEL November 26 1990 JOHN B. CLA USEN MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. John T. Gregory County Administration Office Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, lith Floor Martinez, CA 94553 FROM: Patricia E. Curtin RE: Clayton Valley Farms Meeting on November 27, 1990 at 1: 30 p.m. As you are aware, this office represents Clayton Valley Farms with respect to its Land Use Permit and nine-unit Subdivision. We would like to start off by thanking you for providing us the opportunity to meet with you and other County officials to discuss the alleged violations of the Land Use Permit. As of today's date, we have received two letters commenting on the activities conducted pursuant to the Land Use Permit. The first letter dated November 9, 1990, directed to the attention of Christopher Platt from Karl Wandry was received by this office on November 16, 1990. The second letter dated November 19, 1990, addressed to Mr. Platt and signed by you was received by this office on November 21, 1990. These letters raise several points which are outlined below. Our response to those points are also provided. 1 John Gregory November 26, 1990 Page 2 Points Raised in Letters Response November 9, ,1990: 1. Amend the Land Use Permit On August 6, 1990, a Grading to "address the amount of Permit was issued for a "track grading of the horse exercise/ for horses" allowing 9,000 conditioning track. The cubic yards to be cut and 9,000 valuation of grading is cubic yards of fill, for a estimated at an additional valuation of $16,000. (Exhibit $70,000 and exceeds the 9,000 A) . The actual grading amounted (cubic yards) cut and 9,000 to 20, 000 cubic yards of cut (cubic yards) fill amounts and 20, 000 cubic yards of fill, specified in the Grading for a valuation of $36,000. Permit. (Exhibit B) . On November 21, 1990 the Grading Permit was amended to allow for the additional 11,000 cubic yards and an additional fee of $990 was paid. (Exhibit C) . 2. Amend the Land Use Permit The Land Use Permit allows for to allow for a horse exercise/ such a track, eliminating the conditioning track. need to amend the Permit. For a more detailed explanation, please refer to the attached memorandum addressed to Supervisor Fanden dated October 30, 1990. (Exhibit D) . 3. File a new grading plan This plan was accepted by Mr. showing the "as built" grading Turner on November 20, 1990 and the location of the creek. (Exhibit F) and filed with the Building Inspection Dept. on November 21, 1990. (A reduced copy of this plan is attached as Exhibit E) . 4. Complete an erosion Erosion control procedures are control plan. specified on the "as built" grading plan that was approved by Mr. Whistler on November 21, 1990. (Bottom portion of Exhibit E) . 2 John Gregory November. 26, 1990 Page 3 5. File a drainage permit to No permit is necessary since address the intrusion of the the horse exercise/condi- track into the setback area of tioning track is not within the the creek drainage easement. creek drainage easement. This fact was acknowledged by Mr. Harrington on November 20, 1990. (Exhibit F) . 6. Submit copies of permits Ongoing discussions are and other appropriate documen- occurring with the Dept. It is tation with the Dept. of Fish our position (initially it was & Game. also the position of the Dept. ) that no violations exist since the track is set back from the creek. The Dept. has recommended the planting of willow trees between the creek and track which we shall adhere to. 7. Submit the necessary On November 19, 1990, we information to amend the Land requested from Mr. Turner Use Permit , by November 30, additional time to respond to 1990. allow time to address the additional points raised in the letters and to meet with appropriate staff members and the Supervisors, if necessary. November 19, 1990: 8. Parameters of the Grading See response to #1 above. Permit have been violated. 9. Division 1010 of the See response to #5 above. Ordinance Code with regard to the grant deed of development rights for scenic easements has been violated. 3 John Gregory November 26, 1990 Page 4 10. An exercise track is not The drawings reflect the shown on the original drawings. buildings to be constructed Amend the Land Use Permit to whereas the Conditions of specifically mention a horse Approval on the Land Use Permit training track. and Subdivision address the horse conditioning track. The Zoning Administrator on August 6, 1990, approved the horse conditioning track consistent with the Land Use Permit. (Exhibit G) . Also, see response to #2 above. 11. Dept. of Fish & Game has See response to #6 above. indicated that violations may exist. We are hopeful that we can eliminate the concerns expressed by you and the other various County officials regarding the placement of the horse exercise/conditioning track at the Farm. If we can provide any additional information, we will be happy to do so. cc: Chris Platt, Clayton Valley Farms Karl Wandry, Community Development Byron Turner, Community Development Phil Harrington, Public Works Flood Control Natalie Griffith, Building Inspection Diana Silver, County Counsel h:\home\pec\cvfarm.mmo 4 � X . � 1� By BUILDING DEVARIMENT AND NUMBER ASSIGNED _. __... -__... ' oLJfLullvLa v� .. 41 651 Pine St., Cif-Am 1 lvic1iii 3rd Floor,North Wing g U I LD 1 N G�P E R ` 1 Martinez,CA 945553 3 L 4 080-040-057-4 !! (415)646-2300 IT # GN 165590 f 08/20/90 GRADING—UNSUPERVISED CFFDING—UNSUPERVISED ICANT CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS INC � SEISMIC F'r0 DED FLD ZN DR FEE F-CL 4 0130-040-057-4 OT 0: ET P 0 E:OX 418 SCH DIST MT DIAE:L.O UNI PERMIT I CN 165590 WALNUT CREEK CA DESC GRADING FOR TRACK ,FOR HORSES CLYTN ZN A-2 S I NOR ER NBR UNI FCCO TRCT 7023 LT LP ----....__ ---...-------------...-- STR NO ADDRESS CLYTN ZONE A•-2 CT 3551 .051 FEE CD DIMENSIONS FATE $ VALUATION MX I-IGT 35' NR ST 2 1/2 t F 7023 LOT LUP # .25A 9000 8 .00 .00 MNSY 20' AGG TOTAL 40' FT NO ADDRESS '25C 9000 1? .00 16000.00 OWNR CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS` S ST TOTAL 1.8000 TOTAL 16000.00 EPUR1e40 & M 6yONS1RIIrTTn I/F :iT 35' NR ST 2 1/2 MNSE: 25' r3Y 20 Director of Building inspection Phone 646.2300 TOTAL 40' REAR YD 15' INSPECTIONS ----------------------------------- i---- ----__---------�_ Bldg.Clearances Piers_ R CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS INC I RECE:I:P'r 1 282248 Farms Ufer Ground Stabs 1=T P 0 E:OX 418 I UNSUP GRAD 820.00 hsp.pp asP for WALNU"r CREEK. CA TOTAL PAID** 820.00 5 I Ground Plumb hapecip TITLE 24_( __�_-.- Above approval requ,rea b0ore pouring cc �ONTR V & M CUD!STRUC'lION/E+t'Ir:KHUC PIbg.Pipe Ht.Ducts Jsts,Girder: ET 2121 E: PIEDMONT WAY naoectp a o4c,p PITTSEURG a CA TITLE 24 94565 PHONE 415-4322-962111 Above approval required before subtle, CLASS A LIC 4 397330 Framing Gas Rgh.Elea_ Rgh.Plbg. Htg.Nent a¢pwor k TITLE 24 Above approval required before insulat• Exterior Lath Shear Nailing ExVlnt ' lupecip —_"J-- I Above approval required before plaster Water Hearth and Pressure Chimney hapec,« haDe4ip LICENSED CONTRACTORS DECLARATION Final Elec. Final Gas ry allrrn that I am licensed under the provisions of Chapter 9(commencing vith inspect« f! '0001 of Division 3 of the Busness and Professions Code.and my license is in and effect Final Plbg.&Hlg. Final Bldg. _ ayplc,p an CLASS A LIC # 397350 FINAL TITLE 24 Date RC1 R V & M CONSI'RucrrolJ/E:ACKHOE OWNER-BUILDER DECLARATION - ',Y all—that I am e.emot from the Contracto/s License Law for the foilowag FINAL GRADING cc.7031.5.Business and Professions Code:Any city or county which reauves a - ass• ,a ilio Construct,atter,improve,demolish,or repair any structure.prior to its issuance, .res that apdicant Ip such permit to hie a signed statement that he is licensed ABOVE APPROVAL REQUIRE to the Provisions of the Contractors*License Law(Chapter 9—meneing v4h BEFORE OCCUPANCY '000)of Division 3 of the Business and Prolesslons Coco o,that he is exempt and IM bans for the alleged exemption.Any violator OI Section 7031.5 by.tny /O1�vwimming Pool Perr for a permit subjects the applicant to a Civil penalty of hot more Ina.five..,Z \ Soo.r as owner of the property. or my employees with wages as their sole INSPECTIONS ,tax wia do the work,and the structure is not intended or offered Icr sale(Sec. mess and Professions Code:The Contractor S License Law does not apply to n Survey _. Sits Che-k ___ papMy who dub!or.npwea irrereor,and wry ux+--a swan..w:I...r.;,'; f. •mypyees.p:ovaed that such unprovemenls are rat intended or offered lots c. Elec.Svc.Chg_Re%( )Not Req.( ) M.the buildng'r improvement is sold w,lhSn one year of corndetan,the own r- Bond Beam Rein Steel .11 have the burden of proving that he did tat build or rnpreve fpr the purpr e Und./ground Pool Pipe&Main Drain a owner of the property,am exclusively contracting with licensed contractors to liteProject(Sec.7044,Business and Professions Code:The Contractor's Lice, a Elec:Bonding:Rein Steel net apply to an owner of property who builds w improves thereon.and who contra Is arojacls with a contractors)licensed pursuant to the Contractor S License La } ht.Ground:Slide Ladder lllx.empt er S B.&P.C.for this reason Div.Board r Date Conduit to Light Other Cond. WORKER'S COMPENSATION DECLARATION by affirm that I have a certificate of consent to sell-insure.or a certificau, f THIS SPACE MUST BE SIGNED BEFORE PO Coeponsalien insurance.w a cerbhed copy thereof(Sec.3800.Lab C:). Pool Cavity CY I N(: 500946'i SS Pool Deck:Bonding Ren Steel ANY TRANsi:,oRTATIOtt Div.Board Slide Ladde Certibed copy rs hereby furnished. , Gas Test Control Valve Cerbhed copy is filed with the county building inspection department o de'.,imei Date PRE-FINAL-Electric CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION FROM WORKERS' Pool Equip, Pool Piping COMPENSATION INSURANCE seclion need rot be canpleted it the permit is for one hundred dollars S:III I Pool Equip Enclose Gas Pipe_ 'My that in the performance of the work for which this permit is issued.I s Fences ' � manner so as to become subject to the Work, ABOVE APPROVAL BEFORE PLASTERING OF arty pe n an ral.� Laws�ahlyrrir. - Date _ ----'---- _.-. POOL 0.P PLiCANT:IL aller making this Cerhficaln of Exemption.you should beco ,- •the Wpkers'Gonnpensation provisions of the Labor Cod'.you must foftnwdh Con, NSUPERVISED GRADING/HORSE ARENA Elec.Final Grounding Cheek 'revisions or Ihs Perms shall be deemed revoked. pool completion ' CONSTRUCTION LENDING AGENCY EXPIRATION DATE: Authority by affirm Inas there is a construction lending agency for the performance of BUILDING PERMITS(180 Days) CCC 72-6.010 .vncn tins Oerml i3 issued(Sec.3097,CN.C.) GRADING PERMIT(180 Days) CCC 716-4.1408 NOTICE & WARNING MOVING PERMIT(90 Days) CCC 714-6.202 NAME MOBILEHOME 16 Months) TITLE 25,C.A.C. This Card must Oe po5::`O On the prerrisc S1 RT UNLESS EXTENSION AUTHORIZED IN WRITING BY THE DEPT. Oh1Ced.Ts to be Seen fro t1:.-to Street. CITY All spacas 100%'c the .cd lines shall f ZIP APPROVED. "70 before pIDCCcO.M9 v..lh IrkC next Step inCoF'HIJNE Any work done v-anout the proper Inspect, ythat I have read this apotcation andstate matthe above nformation is car. Bui tin y, eonSldered illegal COr1S1rUCt.On and will not be ,eonp.y Mao city and county«dm.'inc-nn0 state laws rola ting to b,.lnlg ng Dept.B Date e0y authOlao rpp eserilafivns of this cou,ty to enter upon the ab H.W.Gins..Dr.0u,m 9In.Declion This permit may not include permits for GZ y� clan purposes -Z D�d 6 Electrical,Plumbing Work or Healing and Ve {9 N-- 1A ra �3 � ter•~ - .. � - �. ` b , t - �X - . IC Schuricht & Assoc . TEL : 1-415-674-1151 Nov 21 , 90 10 :09 No .001 P .01 J.E. SCHURICHT & ASSOCIATES- 2630 SSOCIATES 2630 Salvio Street CONCORD, CA 94519 oATe roe No. 2i �90 (415) 674.1151 ATTENT.oN ?GUt 6 TO ell u fTt ( .OGcct . czc C WE ARE SENDING YOU Q.-Attachod 0 Under separate cover via the following items: 0 Shop drawings 0 Prints 43 -Plans Cl Samples © Specifications D Copy of letter 0 Change order 13 COPIES PATE' No, DESCRIPTION o ;; 6tt ,.•f THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: 0 For approval 13 Approved as submitted esu it copies for approvai d For your use D Approved as noted D ubmit copies for distribution D As requested O Returned for corrections O Return corrected prints O For review and comment 0 Q FOR SIDS DUE " ' 19 0 PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS Z� a �`// r---_c Gc _ . COPY TO .. - . SIGNED: _ Y it onelosuras ora not as noted, kindly notify we a{ once. Vc;Rr MgrrJMt [h�9S�lrttwr►M Ilrrl. .. • -'!`•' - .. �- X � C COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA BUILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT MARTINEZ,CALIFORNIA 94553 00 .,i.'f :l:':a:�.1�:•X. X. }i' �'; is:%t':':r�:t :i:!i::�:'r::t:::3:.-i is jti t1 A'A'.;y::(.:•, �::['.`j.:r:if. y..L��I.�ii�ii.f•.l: it �.:y�. j'i•: �. .. - :1•}i :{:�h-::Y �t .............. .. t ..t 4:.:t..,... 1... ... i:t.. .rl. :?.t:.r:e?'.t:`4 o -i f ,- I,.}i''I(:i IJ I i:!I cc z Q U ,r`,rL)r. +•r f,"d -y -�4 '_.s:f . 'F * _ `�� s"r } -t�.•,COUNTY BUILD~ 0 INEFECTO G9 AEV.6/89 '.APPLICANT COPY by '' � XlD f, 1 October 30 , 1990= MEMO TO: Chairperson Nancy C. Fanden Contra Costa County Supervisors 805 Las Juntas HAND DELIVERED Martinez, CA 94553 FROM: Mr. Christopher Platt RE: Clayton Valley Farms Land Use Permit 2071-87 Subdivision 7023 i This memorandum is in response to the objections raised regarding the Clayton Valley Farms;_ project by Save Mt. Diablo in its letter dated September 7, 1990 addressed to Supervisor Tom Torlakso7ii and the investigation ordered by the Board of Supervisors on September 25, 1990 in response to those objections . In sum, Save Mt. Diablo alleges that we are violating conditions contained in the above referenced Land Use Permit and Subdivision Approval . Save Mt. Diablo' s primary objection is with the _`placement of a horse conditioning track in a pasture area of the property. It is our position, as shall be demonstrated herein, that the placement of the horse conditioning track is not a violation of any conditions contained in the Land Use Permit or Subdivision Approval. To the contrary, the Land Use Permit and Subdivision Approval allow us to construct a horse conditioning track as part of our pro jeibt. I. BACKGROUND As you are aware, on April 22, 1988, the Contra Costa County Planning Commission unanimously approved the Clayton Valley Farms project. This project consists of a 9-unit subdivision (Subdivision No. 7023) and breeding and conditioning facilities for Arabian horses (Land Use Permit No. 2071-87) . Throughout the approval process, we worked hand in hand with the Planning Commissioners, Save Mt. Diablo and various neighbors. During this process, questions were fielded, criticisms were leveled, concessions were made. As part of our project we agreed to leave 500 acres (out of 580 acres) in Open Space. Please see the attached graph. In addition we elected not to pursue other and more dense development opportunities for the project. At the end of the planning process we were applauded for being up front and honest, receiving a commendation by Chair- person George Feliz as a model for others to follow. Now, almost two and one-half years later, Save Mt. Diablo, along with a small handful of neighbors, are raising unsupported objections to the use of our pasture for a horse conditioning track. In examining the alle- gations raised in their letter, we cannot find a single one of the criticisms to be accurate or just. It is my understanding that your Department concluded the same after conducting an on-site investigation of the complaints made by Save Mt. Diablo. Prior to grading the pasture area for a condition- ing tract, we obtained the approval of the County. On August 6, 1990 , the Building Department issued a grading permit. Thereafter, we began grading the...�: sture area in accordance with the grading permit. On October 2, 1990, 1 received a telephone call from Karl Wandry asking that .we cease all grading opera- tions in view of the complaints made by Save Mt. Diablo. This we did in an effort to promptly and peacefully resolve this matter, despite the�fact that we believe the grading permit was issued properly and our actions taken. pursuant thereto are consistent with the Land Use Permit and Subdivision Approval. Any subsequent work was at the direction of Gordon Whisler for winterization and stabilization requirements. From October 9 - 15 we collected signatures and stoppe&�.-at 90 individuals, predominantly neighbors on Morgan Territory Road, who support our plan to continue the project. These signatures are attached. II . A HORSE TRAINING TRACK IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL nave Mt. Diablo asserts that a horso vonditioning track is not Permitted by the Land Use Permit or Subdivision Approval) since they do not make specific reference to such an activity and its location. It is true that those land use entitlements do not specifically state that a horse conditioning track may be constructed in the selected area. However, the construction of such a track is implicit -in the terms and conditions of the Permit and Subdivision. J A. Land Use Permit There are several references and/or conditions in the Permit that demonstrate that a horse conditioning track was contemplated thereunder. Several examples are demonstrated below: 1 . The face of the Permit specifically states that the permit is being issued for "EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING HORSE TRAINING FACILITY TO INCLUDE A YOUTH TRAINING AP- PRENTICESHIP PROGRAM AND TO HAVE ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS FOR EMPLOYEES AND TRAINERS. " A horse training facility includes an area in which to train and condition horses. Moreover, a small scaled track has existed in the pasture area for over two years. The refinement =of this track is simply an expansion of this portion of the horse training facility as allowed by the Permit. 2. Condition No. 2 states that " (T)he permit is approved to establish breeding and :- conditioning facilities for race horses. . . " Once again, a horse conditioning track is a conditioning facility. 3. Condition No. 4 provides that the "design of horse facilities, residential buildings, accessory buildings , and other structures shall be. . . subject to administrative review and approval by the Zoning Administrator prior to issuanceof a building permit. " (emphasis added) . This section does not apply to the horse conditioning track, since it is not a structure that requires a building permit. This condition only applies to the construction of structures or buildings that require building permits. However, it is important to .note that we did obtain the approval of the Zoning Administrator prior to grading the track. B. Subdivision The Subdivision also contemplates the construction of a conditioning track. For example, Condition No. 9 states that "recreational facilities, small agricultural or animal buildings or structures may be approved in the designated scenic easement areas by the Zoning Administrator. " As has been previously stated, the Zoning Administrator approved the horse conditioning track which is a "recreational facility" under the Subdivision. v 4 III .' THE CONDITIONING TRACK IS CONSISTENT WITH THE A-2 ZONING The pasture area is zoned as A-2. Some of the per- mitted uses within this zone include: " (A)ll types of agriculture, including general farming, horticulture, floriculture, nurseries and livestock production, fur farms, poultry raising, animal breeding, aviaries, apiaries, forestry, and similar agricultural use. " Contra Costa Code Section 84-39 . 402. The conditioning and breeding of horses , and thus, a conditioning track to accomplish those purposes, is an agricultural use and more specifically constitutes "animal breeding" consistent with the uses allowed in an A-2 zone_:_;; Accordingly, it is important to recognize we are not;'geeking to conduct an activity that the law does not already permit us to do. IV. MITIGATION OF CONCERNS RAISED In order to mitigate the concerns -expressed by Save Mt. Diablo, we are willing to implement measures to make the track a very aesthetically pleasing sight. These extra measures and conditions obviously will require additional time and expense on our part, but we feel it is important to take these extra measures to maintain a good relationship with- our neighbors. Consequently, we will agree to screen the horse conditioning track from Morgan Territory Road with native trees and vegetation. In addition, we shall hydroseed the area with drought-resistant meadow flowers. Further, we will place a pond in a portion of the middle of the track. We are also willing to do whatever additional landscaping is necessary to show a thoughtful concern for the complaining neighbors and Save Mt. Diablo. A photograph of the area is enclosed, as well as an artist' s rendering approximating what the landscaping will look like. We appreciate your support in sustaining our use of the property in its present status. I look forward to working with you on this matter. If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to call . Most sincerely, Christopher J . Platt Farm Manager September 21 , 1990 To Whoa It May Concern: This letter is in response to the article in yesterday's Contra Costa Times about Clayton Valley Farms and their development of their land. We have had close contact with Clayton Valley Farms and have watched with interest the developirent of their farm including the housing development, training track and other areas. We feel that they have used wisely the land they purchased and own, to enhance that area of Morgan Territory Road. Their plans will not take anything away from Mt. Diablo, n:.'.fact their landscaping plans will make it nicer. t Clayton Valley Farms have been good neighbors and we only wish we had more like them. Sincerely, cm Ron andl,-�ackie Hess 4343 Morcan Territory Rd. Clayton, CA. 94517 ( 0- , C,�,��- 0 i3oaa-- ZL ezje (tet- -L' . C� SEPTEMBEF � ! , 1990 70 WHOM IT MAY CONCERN WE RESIDE ON MORGAN TERRITORY ROAD. AS ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS OF CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS, WE WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WE ARE NOT OPPOSED TO THEIR BUILDING THE TRAINING TRACK FOR WORKING HORSES. IT APPEARS TO BE DONE IN AN APPROVED MANNER AND WE CAN'T SEE THAT IT SHOULD CAUSE ANY PROBLEMS FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ESPECIALLY WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE HORSE ACTIVITIES FOR THIS AREA . SINCERELY, 9/20/90-Transcription from handwritten manuscript TO: Mr.Bob Walker, Director of Save Mount Diablo Supervisor Tom Torlakson All addressees(cc:)of Mr. Walker's letter, and To Whom it may concern: FROM: Gene Wagner(former resident of 3149 Morgan Territory Road and now residing in Cape Coral, Florida) (813)-643-1500 As a former resident of Morgan Territory Road,the mail service forwarded to myself Bob Walker's letter dated Sept. 7, 1990 to Supervisor Tom Torlakson,all of which I received with considerable concern. Although I no longer am a resident of Morgan Territory Road and perhaps should have no vested interest in the process,I cannot keep from re- sponding to what I perceive as a complete misunderstanding and misrepresentation of what the essence of Clayton Farms really is and the nature "of its people." Wanton disregard and lack of consideration for its neighbors and the environ- ment is so out of character for Clayton Farms that comment is in fact demanded. While living on Morgan Territory Road for four years I had a most interesting interface with the Clayton Farms opera- tion,all of which began four years ago when I signed a petition circulated by neighbors to not grant Clayton Farms its initial permit to pursue its objectives. The petition was signed because I believed a scenario that presented Clayton Farms in a worse possible light. Conscience however prevailed and after an intense evaluation of Clayton Farms and its financial position I reversed my position and heartily indorsed the requested permit. Subsequently, I had spent much time at"the Farm" and made some of the best friends of my lifetime. I visited weekly and got to know its people,their intentions and the farm operation. I find it totally impossible to believe that the manage- ment of Clayton Farms intententionally or realistically disregarded its comitments, (legal or moral). As suspected and believed, an ensuing conversation with Chris Platt,the Farm mananger,validated my belief that the letter of Mr. Walker does not paint a truthful picture. It is not my intention to rebut each alligation as stated in Mr. Walker's letter,rather I suggest all interested parties exer- cise their option to respond to the "Clayton Valley Farms -Visitors welcome" sign and find out what"the Farm" is really all about. I have a hard time believing that a farm populace who launched a"party" to populate a hill side with daffodils or carried tree saplings and buckets of'Water up a hill to plant seedlings and improve the environment is guilty of environmental disregard. What can be more eye appealing to the Morgan Territory Road/Mount Diable scenic view than Clayton Farms'front paddock filled with a dozen mares and young foals prancing about in the pasture. I personally participated on occassion in a program that hosted young girl scouts and cub scouts at the Farm where scouts toured the farm opera- tion, rode an Arabian horse in a controlled environment and took home a Polaroid picture of themselves on horseback. The Farm's contribution to the Morgan Territory community has been totally significant. It is unfortunate that the incorrct personal perceptions of a few neighbors have allowed the Save Mount Diablo organiza- tion to launch an untruthful attack on what is a positive and constructive operation. I have only one recommendation - please search out the truth before a constructive and contributing operation and its people are wrongfully hurt. °':sincerely, /s/Gene Wagner WE,. THE U,NDERSTGNED, Sfl(DORT THE PLANS OF CLAYTONALLEY FARMS TO COMID LETE THE HORSE TRA, -NG FACILITY THEY HAVE BE AT THEIR PROPERTY, 5191 MORGAN TERRITORY ROAD. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY . NAME11I)1)ltl: i:i I'IIOt1L 07Wao ra;,• _ dol_ -- -X51-����-�-- -6�a--���� &-L -z-L -i�-� 7A l� 5Q70 �° y�. r L4j yq622 J 1J 1 ll'7/lK'/' _?/ __!� - LA UL�LJ--gid-/ ✓ 'fes - �- --�_� ��, I 1 5 . -- --- - -- ---- --- ---- - -- ----- 1 G . -- - -- --- ---- -- - -- --- "--7 . ---- ---- - -- -------- 1 8 - - - --- 19 . 20 . ~ � ^ ^ WE THE UNDERSIGNED, SUPPORT THE PLANS OF CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS TO COMPLElE THE HORSE TRAINING FACILITY THEY HAVE BEGUN AT THEIR PROPERTY , 5191 MORGAN TERRITORY ROAD. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE USAGE OF T441S PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY, NAME ADDRESS PHONE DATE 1 . KATHLEEN HCDONALD 5513 PENNSYLVANIA 672-4610 10-14-90 2. KEN BARRY 101 SHALE CLIFF CT. 672-6398 10-14-90 3. BILL NEUMAN 2727 MORGAN TERR. 672-7353 10-14-90 4. EVELYN NEWMAW 2727 MORGAN TERR. 672-7353 10-14-90 5. PAULINE L. CLARK 8625 MARSH CK. RD. 672-6330 10-14-90 6. JIM THORPE 5070 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-2086 10-14-90 7. DOROTHY THORP 5070 MORGAN TERR. RD- 672-2086 10-14-90 E. R.S. SOUSA 2201 MORGAN TERR- RD- 672-2283 10-14-90 9. JULIE WESSMAN 2430 MORGAN TERR. RD- 672-4746 10-14-90 10. STEVE WEN 2430 MORGAN TERR~RD. 672-4746 10-14-90 11 , JACK WESSMAN 1008 MARIPOSA CIRCLE _ 672-5225 10-14-90 12, CAROLYN WESSMAN 1000 MARIPOSA CIRCLE 672-5225 10-14-90 13. JILL ALISA CLARK 2400 MORGAN TERR. RD~ 672-3052 10-14-98 14' DONALD ��LLBN CLARK 2400 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-3052 10-14-90 ` ' WE,,:' TIE UNDERSIGNED, S" 'SORT THE PLANS OF CLAYTON -ALLEY FARMS TO COMPLETE THE HORSE TRAN, ING FACILITY THEY HAVE BE .4 AT THEIR PROPERTY, 5191 MORGAN TERRITORY ROAD. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY NAMF ADDRESS PHONE' DATt' 04 Ijn C.) 3 z -e 7,2' 6 7 . 41'1(_4 fc- 9 . io . 11 . 12 . 13 . 15 . 16 . t-7 . 19 . ------------- 20- ' ^ ^ ^ WE THE UNUERSIGNED, SUPPOR [ [HE PLAMS OF uLAYTON VALLEY FnRMs TO COFFLE | E THE HORSE TR*INIHG FACILITY THEY H*V& BEGUN A | [|~EIR PROPERTY, 5191 MOR6AN TERRITORY ROAD- WE UNDERSTAND THA [ lHE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZON | ND AS SET Sy THE COUHTY . NAME ADDRES5 �Hr��E l)A /E 1 , 8RU:E H. BUSCH 500 LEON WA, 672-7291 ?'GA;L E SLHHARI 4H25 MURGAN ! ERR. 672-Holo 10/ il'W'' S. A. UNNEEH6 3660 A MORGAN TERR. R0. 672-875w 10/14/9x 4i::-UNKELT 3674 MORGAN TERR. RD. o?2-4674 10/ 14/+0 b. SU5AU W1LLIAMSOW 1510 OAKHlLL LANE 672-6976 6' LURIE HOE A440 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-0477 10/ 14/90 7, BOB WALE 3510 OCKHILL LANE 246-5282 10/14/9 'D 8. ROAERT A. BUSH 4440 MORGAN TERR- HD. 602-0339 10/ 141%' i ` �r / ` W-Z, THE UNDERSIGINED, SUPPORT THE PLANS OF CLAYTON VALLEY rtktcmzj lv •' CO''^PLETE THE HORSE TRTING FALITY THEY HAVE B� N AT. THEIR PROPERTY , 5191 MORGANCCIRRITORY ROAD. WE UNDERST?.,.D THAT THE USAGE . OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY NAME Ai)1)itESS P110Nt: • �� -- oR.� •t-c a 4— o 6 It � t t1{ ? -i• t '--�' -- — � -- — -- — l R •A7• Iwo ate( — /3 6 . y 4 fi2r= XI 9 . 7Z-- Zg Zl cxecF .eh. c'o 72 •31Q 7 V1.3/��ice,-,�, f'/% /- V 14 . 7Vy� ) / ` 4"oo y 09 49 4150 '/ L1z.-b C� 19 . �. t(�1 / ~ . ^ �r �^ 0 . . WE `THE UNUE��I�H�l,, �UPPOR/ 1 H PLANS D+ CLAfTON VALLEY AR;S lh COMPLEYE THE HORSE TRA1N1NG FACILITY THEY HAVE BEGUN Ar THEIR PROPERTY, 5191 MORGAN TERRITORf RUAD, WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE USAGE Of THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET D/ lHE COUNTY. NAME ADDRESS PHONE Do FE . ' 1 . ETEVE BER6 4?51 MORGAN & CHR RD. 672-1299 15-1z-90 2- PANJI BERG 4751 MOR6AN & LRR RD. b72-1299 10- 12-90 3. DOROTHY LOVATO 4181 LEON DR. 672-3o9/ 10-13-90 4. LINDA J. RODENBURG48% MOR6AN TERR. RD- 672-4752 10-13-90 5, MAART M. MURRAY 1300 BIXLER RD. BRENTWD. 634-8222 1()-z3-90 6. FR. D. ROTIENDURG 4B85 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-4752 10-13-90 7. vIWCE DIMAGGIO 16711 MARSH CREEK RD. 778-4748 10- 13-9D S. 1}E*NNA MAGENHE1MA 51 MT. TAMALPATS PL. 672-7508 10- 13-93 9. ROBERT RODENBERG 8863 MARSH CREEK RD. 672-2921 10- 13-90 10. RAY A. IVERSOW I } 8595 MARSH CREEK RD. 672-31`)7 | 11 . SUEAN JAMES 859b MARSH CREEG RD. =72-3t0/ 1� l3-90 12. NANCY MARTIN 1514 W1100W ST- M*RTINEZ 22`/-0714 1:-13''9() 33. KATHERINE ROSE 468 DlA8LC� IN. 228-2079 10' 13-9V 15. LUTHER MAHTER 1514 WLiKKIW 13T.MARfHEY 229-07lq 10- 3-y(j 16. SUE ELLEN F{lMMlLH 4200 LEON DR. 6}2-66)4 17. 4200 LEOH DR. 18. FRED HEN! ! 4�5� HO�6A�� TEH�' 6u. to s' �v j ?. ROPER ! I . |(UC1N 4250 /1ORL"N / ERR- RF'- 20. JAME6 ER1Ci(SDN 49% 413RG,H iBqR, 02' ' ' - - ` - ,WE, THE UNDFRSIGNED, SUPPORT THE PLANS OF CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS TO COMPLETE THE HORSE TRA� NG FACILITY THEY HAVE BEAf AT THEIR PROPERTY, 5191 MORGAN RRITORY ROAD. WE 'UNDERST 0 THAT THE USAGE -OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY. NAME ADDRESS PHONE uAiD L5 2 (ac--C q 34-3 3 22L7 it/ ds. j 170 6A 677, -YS[. 5- `� �� � L 6. � /!/v o� G 'tom--iia 13 'lrr/�a ori � o -''�. ���. 3 ?.,�/ ji�MO L/ JV�90'.z 2 12 4 17 . j 9 9 . o 0 . ~^ ~` ^ ^ WE THE UNbERSIGNED, SUPPORT THE PLANS OF CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS TO COMPLETE THE HORSE TRAINING FACILITY THEY HAVE BEGUN Al THEIR PROPERTY, 5191 MORGAN TERRITORY ROAD. WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY. NAME ADDRESS PHONE DATE 1 . LEROY RONALD HESS 4343 MORGAN TERR' RD. 672-0232 10-10-90 2' JACQUELINE J. HESS 4343 MORGAN TERR' RD. 672-0232 10-10-90 3. DWIGHT ALAN COMPTON 2991 MORGAN TERR. RD' 672-2991 10-10-90 4. JAMES PACHECO 4265 CLAYTON RD. 682-2907 10-11-90 5. HARVEY E. TOPONCE 4970 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-4565 10-11-90 6' RUTH TOPONCE 4970 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-4565 10-11-90 7' MARSHA MARTIN 4950 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-1833 10-11-90 G. DON KITTRELL 4940 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-3721 10-11-5/0 9. MARILYN KITTRELL 4940 MORGAN TERR. RD' 672-3721 10-11-90 10 MATT RIDEL 5130 MORGAN TERR RD 672 1278 10-11-90 | ' ^ ^ - l 11 . CAROLE BAIRD 3005 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-1785 10-11-90 12' CELESTE MASON 5130 MORGAN TERR. RD' 672-1278 10-11-90 13. WILLIAM C' REASONER 5150 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-2820 10-11-90 14. BEULAHM. REASONER 5150 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-2820 10-11-90 15. ANTHONY E. MATTOS 3103 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-H018 10-12-90 16' BERNARD P. LAVATO 4181 LEON DR. 672-3097 30-12-90 ` 17. DEBBIE EVONIUK 5140 MORGAN TERR' RD. 825-6841 10-12-90 18' TOM EVONIUK 5140 MORGAN TERR. RD. 825-6841 10-12-90 19' KIMBERLY BLACK 4885 MORGAN TERR. RD' 672-2616 10-12-90 20' Jnt L' PJCHOLOTA 4885 MORGAN TERR' RD' 672-26I6 10- 12-90 ` . ' - WE, .k 7lY�+ lJ 1YL2\. 1 VLLY ♦.neu .. ,. v...., - FARMS TO COMPLETE THE IIPRSE TRAININGFACILITYTHEY VE BEGUN AT THEIR . PROPERTY, 5191 Morgan ritory Road. WE UNDERSTP THAT THE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN CoM LIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING r1S SET BY THE COUNTY. NAME ADDRESS PIIONE kol 2. 3 . 4 . 5. 6. 7. 8. 9 . 10. 11 . 12. 13 . 14 . 15 . 16 . 1;7. 18 . 19 20. WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, SUPPUk'i' 'i'tii^, rl lui40 Ui l.LX111�Jly COMPLETE THE HORSE TRAT TNG FACILITY THEY HAVE BEC"N AT THEIR ^RO"ERTY, 5191 MORGAN .tRITORY ROAD. WE UNDERST. THAT THE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE A--2 ZONING AS SET BY THE COUNTY. NAME ADDRESS PRONE r � 2. lLt�t�,st F &a 0 � a 67z-245 3 1` l`? � .1/Yt1�C /0 V7 /Cd -7 77"I to/ic 5. 6 . 7. Aj 8. 9 M-1- 10. � ,,> "Ms-� p2 7� ir1� T � ,, leA &71-o 7i. 1 1 '! �l�'LLt ✓ !� G/} 2 G� G,:r / �f% ✓ 14 t Lt7/L,1 �C_�!l. /L{ &-/z 12 - �N 411 14 . �.:_1tn`n G � > 419 15 L �- (�51� I4119. , ., '-. �i t�-t 'tom 20. J �-- a..� �-.. � -�--- I 21 , ' �vo�o m9aGA-ra iE w-ro Q� , 'lJ�yr�n 6-7 .~ ^ - y^ lGNED, SCPPORT THE OF Cl-AY |L/h VALLEY Fopms 10 CTMPLETE THS HORSE TRAI11I1AG FA[lLI1 ` l !0 f rUE THEIR PROPEkTV~ 5191 MURGoN [ERRI [ORY ROAD' WLi- l HAT THE USAGE OF [HIS PROPERTY IS IN LOhPL l ANwE 01lH !HE 0-2 ZONING AS GET HY THE COUNTY. A DDRESS PHUNE 3XV � 1 . 0- VisJ*W 6046 MOi-k:GAN TERR. RD. 672-2458 1Q/ 1Q/9, 6040 M(jRGAAj TERR. RD. 672-2450 1() l oz 9 -) 3' D&` i/?Ey NELIkER 5261 MOHGAN lERH. RD. 672-9749 1�; in f%) 41.u-u1u torlOwisMAN 5861 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-602Y lo, 1 ' `/0: 5v8*P) NEdNER 5861 MOHBAN TERR. RD. b72-9749 10. jo/90 6. LHERIL MDRGAN `^ '�' 6040 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-245B 10/ 10/90 _ 7. TQM rabLS 00 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-37&7 10/ iO/90 B- TEDl'x M} LLS /�-`� 5B80 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-3767 10, 10/9() 9, KAPE: FAHLUW 2575 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-0715 10/ 1 1/00 - - 10. -1 - RLOW 2575 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-0715 10/ 11/90 11 . |'(AFTlN B. WRIGHT 4390 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-4980 10/ 11/90 12'JPOR011HY T. WRIGHT 4390 MORGAN TERR. RD. 67244480 10' 1 l /90 13Al .YE U[LEY 4191 LEON DR~ 432 10/ /90 14 . PEApnA UTLEY 4191 LEON DR. 67117432 10/ /90 - 15'DEE z/EE HEATH 4190 LEON DR~ 672-5126 10112/90 16. CH43S H. HEATH 4190 LEON DR. 672-5126 10/ z2/90 17. ROBIN KELLY BOX 742 ALAMO CO. 2E4-5079 10112/90 — - -'---' -- 1�. V�LARIE J. AUSTIN 836 RYAN CT. CONCORU 686-6940 10/12/90 19. R. MILLER 4141 LEON DR. CLAYTC1hl 672-q141 i0/ 12/90 20~W?Ll -7E!'MER 13580 MARSH RD. 672-4487 1w/ 11/90 21 . GERALD J. ZELLA 6020 MORGAN TERR. RD. 672-4607 10 14/9� ' `r ` - > . / _ Wr,, 111E , .....- .,_.. ^AR^tS TO COMPLETE THE HnSE TRAINING FACILITY THEY HAVE BEGUN AT THEIR PROPERTY, 5191 Morgantitory Road. WE UNDERSTR, THAT THE USAGE OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN COM LIANCE WITH THE A-2 ZONING\�►S SET BY THE COUNTY. NAME ADDRESS PHONE 2 . SuPPef� 7Z- 3r,,c1 1 D , 3 .y support 4 Ica W a&-k-�- C� � , �p obC I G La �a KI G 72-37 L S Ai-�� 87 9. 10. 11 . 12 . 13 . 14 . 15 . 16 . 17 . 18 . . 19 . 20 . NEIGHBORHOOD APORT FOR CLAYTON VALLEY FARMS PROJECT COMPLETION It 4 a o a � U LFnN pR ADJACENT TO FARM • FARM AREA • EXERCISE AREA =:: SUPPORT WITHIN DIRECT VIEW SUPPORT WITHIN 2 MILES SUPPORT WITHIN 3 1/2 MILES OTHER SUPPORT `_° A� + lj� 4 ��C, Qty�.�Y t••f � iv, . .�' •` it `�`` "� ` ' ��t ���'''�� + '�� �� .° t„ +F S^eA tt r.�F ir2Bl .Yf1 .Kt- Ctt c µ� 1 ti��xt FlM .9 � ��OH ► l i 4�,d _1 }.,,�IL�-.y„ � y jf 1 p a z rr a } 'p � ♦ y '� 8� �`' t,y r^- 1 a `�p.3i j rk p'1Y •�3� e..�1�", �y-.r`1. :�^ t`n a y k�•c, 1� s% �. >t ,• 'W 1 3 r t VA, ,`',� .y t .i ',`�.t"r�$c ��t,"x �.l s� �'� ,4 # 41� i� t y;,,g a w' } � �'•' � • .,.i',y t. Sc,�� i�; � �-: �Y ,fS[f "�° t.�i=�� x l i°�,- A4"`.� ,'y� •� i yiX • &F� � r r, � �.� �`'t � _ T y'4...c A• 'R`7'"y� i N i�« v.f'�yy�,y�� `Y�� Z:�� �JW t ""; .„&.1. Y;t'f Yl a `.�• S r. Yry t: t ��tip4°y iC �.� t� krl� �S f ,fit t tt��+tpit•� ��Y.1 y'if• l"a-. ,� ,l i C t ;z f' yw .G.t: •n�.• le r' � i-• k' �t �; a'k i` �aS�:i �t iy�t al S 0... i fix . C .t;V . r 77777 iAlyea - , ���„ww•^�"•�.r .. o imIn III mem�-- � , '1 ,'•r ","• rn CAI h .pie• ,` +' •+i � III �,,` ,`, .^\ _� 6 '.' o Z \ 13. y G 4 r' t +' , C7 0 cri 5. rn `�. '\\, '��:\ , ' p`• �,/` `'' .{ 1 �;�cry r- m h Ail PILL. 94 It '. wQ{gym � T� �\ ✓\M rN. r" '^^. WWC � X —DATE FROM— SUBJECT ol .4 _ C7LCr(.. ��'��.v�cs r~���7�'1;,.� �%•�;�f_�l�l.�,��i���--7 ) :r; •�.1/VLs�'J 4 1,LV, 4i�-)j7 74- SIGNED PLEASE REPLY HERE TO DATE SIGNED INSTRUCTIONS FILL IN TOP PORTION,REMOVE DUPLICATE 4YFLLOW)AND FORWARD REMAINING PARTS WITH CARBONS.TO REPLY. IC FILL IN LOWER PORTION AND SNAP OUT CARBONS.RETAIN TRIPLICATE(PINK)AND RETURN ORIGINAL. FOR.I, � x . G / ^ Y DATE �- •/(,� SUBJECT /✓V 76Z3 ' sti(/�tvZ., 'L Ldp,y£+-►) .G���— 445 ,c Airl6lr& 57 L/ /M-4" 7 lip ,j 9. SIGNED • PLEASE REPLY MERE EXERCIS ,� J. E. Schur oc . 2630 Sa 1 vi o St, AV j A., A 94519 (415) 674 • .'_�.ti r e �>r.:". . . i. • �},;..r.e • ^'' i aYi t.. w.tc ..+,.�.., '.:'� I., "'— F_ •.:tom^::::::7:�=' "'r:• �;Ti•: ter,:• :' iii ^j•w�. 'Iw�{r�• y -:R �r.� :v'4'�d`�T� Y''+t��I.r ryt hMN•}fZ f Iw -H:.l{ tIT�TYV f .t ... � '� {' ,� a,.rt�"i >..+-�, sr• �+-4yL x s.: ♦ Y' •, �xS�t;•• cr�{r••.�wt x}. 1� au t -c �is .;�y,.}t T•�• � �.... �5.. �, ,{+sem•.. !•G-'mac `'x"�"'r' -} ,ss ��.,�- ,x � *'- rX� 1.:54 �x� ' '^�iQ�i."".S".�. .w''>�c!a •� • • • • E.. -fru'r +L�:•�y�.�' •.ate.: �r. 354;- �jG•au�3�.,..arrt• `• • � • • _T.t Y Y�.•{•"�t�Y.�. ••-Wit' ��y. _ - '=""`•. •• 1 •• 4�Run�,"?tea' l'"•+Y- ill, Illigo,OWN z.• ��� �i+tir'+'b9 Payr- , - • •• • •„e,. tibE.r3.•:'1'%�'�..T:'TJ•y`r',•�,.t,:. '$`,•'ti:�i•'ti • • f • • • •1- S T �7.Yfrs'rt•'•f.T'vi!'y^T�:"i'�'e^_F�• •�n{,.�`�.->'��^X`�4'::�� >. .}S�rt,yY_�,;.Cti?+.."':•:�:,: • s r t • • • e >��'w�,nR rw ar f • : ..S•N'..�J,til aF s"t3 f I` d "'J �L •y._of-t:•• �r";`+�`'xr r•r':�:�: .: ..a. • • • `rte . 3 f � � • t�{* ►Fr a� �X'�• ..£.:�,4.._.«2T `_mfr� r a r= t r I �1 � w �� _• -..f + s.. of -: r'}"' Jy�>��y�M•y. •.f!^at!��.,� _ ..;'+. � X.:. �ik �:tt,�...r%.`..:�, :t{tix� s• a•w + '"S�'1�t ''.��+' w- •shy ,.....•*•..s•,"ti 7-; . .,�.•.v .y ;?; � e�rf•� �rte-• b •;. - + r .i{w,. aria s � 5�.i '-r .�D� i�yZ.?�Xty;:,n'_.�...i�- :�r...+M,...~�tfaf - a sr 'r o.. ' �\ r' , ;• f4:"; autj;��� "a'!f •\ �r3yiC t. � a+j• a' :C` �r � J s rj,}•y1 �'7�� \}r'r�w'�7� Sl.�"...—y lr.�. i.;'.'+< r•y � _ z r 1}s,S\�-v� Y�"'! 'LaY.''fy� � •� {,�F'r: ;��e,, y .� h �4,ri}�rk`�t:M;�s�.it-. .•.a -1+:;�'�,�I�.,�,3;��'`i .��rr- c,,'^rw :h r �.�•yw '�:. r...ww y �, �+'"J'1,� yC xg }�+\k\Y• W.. '.e ,.,�i'"��< .••;.,4wr't.•-fir i r=•`""q'-tw�'.•r:..r�F 1{ .{r �l S + �f �. f�'SraG �I .; ��•'!' `,F t t� .� � ..et•rl iii •Lcy ±+,:. .. .a ..._ '� } TrX-q:.'r�. w; F,.�"E: Jr-�"` .�•tir fl \.'t.,,..., '.I�"'wy_L.f ,; '•: T"77M, '^s i >wc. 6'S'� STATE OF CA OXNI T1f�l a r#"'E1 e'r • • •_ui .w 1537CF9 901 on day c( bm the rev ,w•.ate "� Z+';x n- or pmvod to t;ft I%*basis of 81 4 ISO be thit to be Noury PI in&W for '•7. V i•;0„ate�k• ti+. ""x ••1 t • ' ✓♦�n Y IR.Y. s”.4� . T1•T �. '^.Y!^f�.: �'�� �'=St2;ia�..Teti`, 5 nd State a ' e .• C t.. . .)`.if:V'.�:4--Jt"'..<o-%a�^.�_yff.. •`�.y-.a S!- "y-'iiy q Lr'-�v�w�s�e+a ap••s.� rz._,�,o��a. ,tx � _� s�-h�-t"`;"'�. = Toa- � Y i �J`a�`fYY'•;��:.�'�. r^��'Y..=l,'. �_�!S- ik+,e,'��,•�. 2 F.2467 R,11192 Mis am *�. r N. t . k. T•.. .t-t• 3 • «Lt- - Y 47 i j..7ra.4 LK w.T ~�}t' � . K �.ry 7... r1� t J,� '•-y. .J s r - t y r i w. i ��T a ];_ ..vs-.� -.•.:� .y.. ♦ .. Tye ',J,y^'. '< � .,_s .e, a.. T•. yi -w � *<'. r: :r C•s7 v .'..;a -.��i-ice �.-:`�z;,; •%;S:n<. .;� ar=`` • w'�` `W Ten— •v.:ees .:.. .tom����' r.���•`-":-•'.vim�:i�::;ly=�. � ct..'-a;. •yi 4��T f V. ��� F71 i r� • t - -•- ti �l �•�.. ••! NN ..f F4 S •Y.ii" _ t r. .Sa Fav z+. �� s s ,, :: sj•c x tr �t DTZ, f 1 r 1 ` lttf'4t. Jf• `'� •� 3 Sl �'�'1�\�a/' i'. -Y' �; j'7' ry t a. -- -,r.Y ` � �y _ ie+.r r i,'+ r T s ' :.��v- � �.� ,.� u 4'F ,? �?" �.F•4�'!/}+er.;I'�w"r-'.�.r +4 '4�r:,. _ . 4 3 ifJ ilf{.:F•L t {s t. .�-,s.!�u.y � x`� �'.er f..y `at`Ji�,. f � t ..t w,•n`�i�. :^'may rt i: �.. i i.:.. '=.tea:r',c�;+�jr'-g•,`: '•-,r•wLfrw�' N .� "•+' +��ry iT�^ �` mT. y�-t i��i'+a�."Yti S 1 t}f �i}�rY �i���•�i�A .•4e� yi`i iLj.:4'7`�w'r* �'s•Ty`�'��.jatJ T � y j k�{`� �• 'iti"5� �fs�s�.a E.x y >;•.- f i fit. qP f Ta+&Jk;y. ��-+ts:+t'4'p�.�i�k,r Sr.Jf� yaa�•t.G_sf+4`: t�f.n""'r'tix yi:•.i_tom f?;�yr 'x fir.}-moi ,v_°•- T'64�•�i',G4�.1�'r.??!�u'"',I.�i'•4ey`••1_ • � �. �' sy.. ,� {, .,,Sr 'cam-•. ,rtUs: �.�.i-F�s/,w.a-^N�-'.•p�.�'?��yhJT�rzs j' 1 1 /1 1 1 1 •'f'y i4oy�v�S � $�i'�'t4�'•i'a�•�. • �.?'L.i:d,Yr:"�'��:'-r•+ .. •:_ice!+. �•f M�tvF'MR ff..! f Ki. •nif.��Y..x`}. � I . �"a�.,.KK7'�ro.'�4''rs Yi^ ` x _ •' ..�, y :'d yr ,,,,, � «� r I •.;. s'='"�j"=t�M•^iL iO:�r,,,��y�'�/�''r-.�,`_M'.`i .�•�' Sy�.W}..:s. _ �. � 4 v Z �r •� ♦ S f1 � � yc .t � -,.�,��.A 'y y rq .+,.,•,,�n.js..�, j:s0 lv)�"�:+St,�'i•' 1 tom, xA, aw tM+.Mt _ t5x��h•� J xyfh q, 't c,r,"�• xyyr.c .,{• ��yr ;r,•� }X•tt -..i f-t y t t a...c is. �•..-i.,*i � _33�� }"t �' rt +r .x 7�,y+..• tv.- 4 Y _ >�w�T(� +,t*.ic . r�y ss'�f �' -'i l.f^L~`S::`S:�:w.t -xsy- «. z .a�iH.,. ,_ t. ,.,�:, ,:'i.:'� ... .=: �,". ,f'_ •.-.--..., A!"'�•��,w ` d x� •sA...•� �t .� `< 'U i.o-�rW'a Y� `I,�q ?t7 �"�$} ..r M: ':� . �" �rrwwnrr�w..7 ..r:':,r. �i ti +I�f` :s �'" *•�t :�• y,•.i y. Stc:+•r .. '.•.Tf.. l;, �.t .i: `�yl'P4f-f. y .'•' v-t t`•' 'f� �'_ � kfi;4•fir„tt).,-�_ .^�•'•C�;fi /t � tir .n rc-w►_ 7. •- +��a �.t$�.�r•;,t 4 L;a�S�t'"„y,,�'""•4� riz IM� 1` '{':•r ti'i r- ��'"�.y+w. ,s. .'l!Mtti%si'�r"tr''i.�'_ - is +M.K�C`y��A..wwrtf�iw�.r_ai .v «.,rr+�"t:'ewt4.`,,;3r • IMM t- "��n�..c�".• 1 1 1 .� �X'•`'�51jF},r�•�Ki»f. +w Ceti:. i�e+ddCni r 1' t�sr�..t. t• 1 11 ,amu, .: ! 1 f • 1 1 1 1 }.r�.'F-ski}waay�,��� ' `�.tfi-*'1"x.`.1,.• .+..-. WN w -. +-1.�,� ,��4',"yi•�K- y�z tet. f ��-. = ,;;,':3?,�-rte,`•,. •.r :-i; yam: ..^`�n"��f�` '.'r�.,"�'�"`•_" , �2�t•F'�.r�t�M. k_ RKL '�et�.f�.-IrV'.v,'»"r1��._,- Y1� :•}�S�j�._.�iv�'M1 r 'f rr� n•-.. r .+M+Y.!�r'��k ��x � 7# ii}y�'�:.L.[•. w•.�}i. �{'��k'S� .t�..•�rS���_ h?ik1.�i3„t'�.tP'rJ L'i�,� itL�'^Y'-�i��r-� .nM1.y;y^•�'• - `<YS:a� .P�.i}i��.-.+ f�q�(���y�.R..'”. .e 4�+%*' r t•.. r7. •''"_ _�+'cC::e.7��_..�-':•�.�f,r���4 d-f.fir {� �,,. .�y:��h Ft r,� r. 2. .r,r. ''i ;"��:..z. �w.'�Yw. 4A�.12.•e. -. •••t'. y. �.r.. ...•...,-a:•'t,�T; •adF""'r.-'nr� -�•.'}0•�> IgT�•;F.. N:5 iss lag MON--- zZ... PLAT TO ACCOMPANY DeBolt ClvU Enzincering LEGAL DESCRIPTION FOR a I I S.F.Won vac." . .... . C..hi.,ia 94526 c P-NIC EA5EMENT 415 937-3700