Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10161990 - H.7 T?: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS p,M FRS : Harvey g. Bragdon, Contra Director of Community Development t-%- --A DATE: October 10, 19 9 0 Courcy SUBJECT: Appeal of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning „Commission Decision Pertaining to File 12894-RZ and MS 86-89 ' (DeBolt Civil Engineering/Jean-Pierre Poulleau) (APN 198-200-004) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOWQvIMENDATION(S) a BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Sustain the denial decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission as indicated in Option A below. , PROJECT DECISION OPTIONS Option A - Sustain Plalning Commission Denial Decision 1. Deny the appeal of the applicant, DeBolt Civil Engineering. 2 . Deny Rezoning File #2894-RZ. 3. Deny M.S. 86-89. 4 . Approve the findings contained in Resolution 133-1990 of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission as the basis for the Board actions. Option B - Reverse thePlanningCommission Decision 1. Accept the environmental documentation prepared for this project as being adequate. 2 . Grant the appeal of the applicant. 3 . Approve File #2894-RZ, rezoning the 3 . 5-acre site from General Agriculture (A-2) ) and Single Family Residential (R-20) to Single Family Residential (R-20 and R-65) as shown on Exhibit I. 4. Approve M.S. 86-89 for three parcels subject to the attached conditions. 5. Introduce the ordinance giving effect - to the aforesaid rezoning, waive reading and set forth date of adoption of same. 6. Direct the Director of Community Development to prepare findings for Board consideration documenting the basis for the Board action. REVISED TENTATIVE MAP AND SITE PLAN The Board of Supervisors rescheduled this item to October 16, 1990. The applicant , submitted a vesting tentative map to substitute for the previous tentative map. The applicant has also submitted a site plan and description of proposed improvements, indicating how a low profile development could be developed without damaging existing trees on the two proposed building sites. The conditions of approval have been revised to reflect- the submitted site plans. ;The revised conditions allow, for a public hearing on proposed building plans prior to issuance of building permits. The-applicant is agreeable to the recommended conditions_ CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: _ YES SIGNATURE: i r RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINIISTRATORRECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): 1. ACTIONOF BOARD ON October 16, 1990 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X On October 9, 1990, the Board of Supervisors continued to this date the hearing on the appeal by DeBolt Civil Engineering (appellant) from the decision :of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission on the request by DeBolt Civil Engineering (applicant) and Jean-Pierre Polleau (owner)to rezone two acres of land from General Agricultural District (A-2 ) to Single Family Residential (R-65) (2894-RZ) and to subdivide 3 . 5 acres inti three parcels (MS 86-89 ) in the Alamo area. Mary Fleming, Community Development Department, presented the staff report on the request to subdivide the property into three . parcels, the existing house, and a brief description of the proposed structure sites. She commented on the staff recommendation with modified conditions of approval and on the two options for action by the Board. 4 The following persLs appeared to speak: Mark Armstrong, Gagen, McCoy, McMahon and Armstrong, 279 Front Street, Danville, reprelsenting the applicant and owner, referenced two letters dated Septemberl26, 1990 and October 2, 1990 that should be part of the record and .he commented on the site plan that had been done and on various proposed conditions of approval. Paul Frechette, 245 Union Avenue, Campbell, architect, commented ls on issues including hilide development, and conditions of development. Bruce Kittess, 1600 Cervato Circle, Alamo, representing the Alamo Improvement Association, spoke in opposition. Robert B. Petrie, 1672 Las Trampas, Road, Alamo,- spoke in opposition. Eleanor Kessler, 1878 Las Trampas, Alamo, spoke in opposition. William. V. Cardinale, 1411 Silva Dale Road, Alamo, spoke in favor of the project. Mr. Armstrong spoke in rebuttal, and he submitted a letter from Mr. Randy Smith, 1600 Las Trampas Road, Alamo, in support of the proposal. Gene DeBolt, DeBolt Civil Engineering, applicant, spoke in rebuttal. Jean Pierre Poulleau, 1700 Las Trampas Road, Alamo, owner, commented on his proposed plans for the property. The public hearing was closed. Supervisor Schroder commented on issues including the unique quality of the Alamo area, this being an infill project, his concerns with grading, height, access, landscaping and architecture, . and he recommended that the MS 86-.89 be approved for three parcels but condition the approvalion a very strict staff review of the final plans, taking into consideration the grading, the height, the access, the landscaping, the architecture and appropriate staff considerations of the buildings to determine whether two dwelling 'units comfortably fit on these parcels of property and if not, - staff would be directed to allow only one. Helmoved approval of MS 86-89 with those conditions and with th� addition of acritical staff review. Supervisor McPeak seconded the motion with reservation. Supervisor McPeak clarified with Supervisor Schroder his intent. 2. Supervisor Torlakson questioned how the staff review would be accomplished, and requlested clarification on the number of lots. Karl Wandry responded to Supervisor Torlakson' s questions. Supervisor McPeakirequested clarification of the number of lots. i I . . . Supervisor Schroder and Mr. Wandry responded to Supervisor McPeak' s request. The Board discussed the number of lots that would be allowed under the Country Estates designation of the General Plan. Supervisor Torlakson indicated he would feel uncomfortable voting today without further information on the issue of Country Estates, and proposed continuing the matter for one week. Victor Westman requested a response from the applicant' s attorney as to whether he wouldJobject to a condition that leaves to the Zoning . Administrator a decision as to whether the parcel map will have a configuration of two or three lots. Mark Armstrong responded that there would be .no objection to that kind of a proposal, and .their concern would be a delay in the matter, and he requested that the Board support the recommendation of Supervisor' Schroder. Supervisor Fanden indicated support for Supervisor Schroder ' s motion. Supervisor McPeak indicated support for- Supervisor Schroder' s motion. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that Option B recommendations 1, 2 , 3 , 4 with amended. conditions (Exhibit A attached) , 5, and 6 are APPROVED; and as in recommendation 5, Ordinance No. 90-96 is INTRODUCED, reading waived, and October 23 ,x .1990 is set for adoption of ",same. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS .A TRUE UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: 111, IV, II NOES: V - AND ENTERED ON THE MI'NUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: I A13STAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Community Development ATTESTED _October` 16, 1990 DeBolt Civil Engineering PHIL BATCHELOR. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF :Jean-Pierre Poulleau SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Public Works-Steve Wright! Assessora M382 7-83 San Ramon Fire Protection Dist. BYOAI"^ ,DEPUTY i I EXHIBIT IIAII CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 86-89 1. The application is approved for a maximum of three parcels. The number of parcels shall be determined bythe Zoning Administrator after a public hearing to review detailed development plans which shall include grading plans, landscaping and architectural plans. 2. Approval of this minor subdivision is contingent on adoption of the rezoning application, File #2894-RZ, by the Board of Supervisors. 3. The project shall be designed,graded and constructed in substantial conformance with the synopsis dated September 20, 1990, prepared by Mr. Paul 0. Frechette,Architect, and the accompanying site plan, on file with the Community Development Department, or as otherwise approved by the Zoning Administrator.. 4. At least 45 days prior L issuance of a grading permit or filing a parcel map, the applicant shall submit the following documents for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. ! A. A revised site plan/grading plan showing proposed driveway, residential footprints, retaining walls, proposed vehicular right-of-way, and right-of-way dedication for East Bay Regional Park District pedestrian,easement along Las Trampas Road. The plan shall clearly identify all areas of proposed cut and fill. The location, trunk circumference, and dripline of all" trees with a trunk circumference greater than 20 inches shall be identified and whether the trees are to be preserved or removed. The plan shall be accompanied by a report from a qualified,arborist that reviews the site plan and recommends measures to protect all trees with a circumference of 72 inches or greater during the construction and post- construction stages of the project. The site plan sh II satisfy the following criteria: 1. Site grading shall be essentially limited to the area of driveways and building footprints (e.g., no graded yards). 2. The driv Tway and private road grade shall not exceed 20%. A flat "landing"I (no more than 4% grade) shall be provided for the 40 foot section of the proposed private road immediately abutting Las Trampas Road. 3. Retaining; walls shall not exceed three feet in height. 1 i 4. The applicant shall submit evidence that the proposed pedestrian easement is in accord with the standards of the East Bay Regional Park District. 5. One purpose of the review will be to minimize removal or damage to existing mature trees. B. Site plans/building elevations and floor plans for proposed residences on Parcels B and C. Residential design shall conform to the following standards: 1. As set forth in the synopsis and site plan, grading shall be minimized, and to the extent possible, a natural building site shall be utilized. The residences shall be constructed to fit naturally into the hillside. Design should have stepped-down levels that conform to existing grades. 2. Effective visual bulk of structures shall be minimized. Structure height shall not exceed 30 feet (plus chimney, etc.) measure parallel to adjoining finished grade. 3. Downslope elevations should be articulated to break building mass and reduce visual bulk. Flat downslope building elevations shall be avoided. 4. Roof line shall generally employ a trellis roof with slopes parallel to nearby terrain. 5. Exterior building colors, including roof, shall be dull, earth-tone. 6. New fen iling shall be limited to open wire except that cyclone fencing is prohibited. 7. The structures on Parcels B and C shall be limited to 3,000 square feet, excluding garages. Applications for building permits shall comply with the approved site plans. Relevant const duction-stage tree-protection measures shall be shown on construction drawings. 5. Prior to Zoning Administrator approval of final design, architecture and grading and landscaping, the Zoning Administrator shall hold a public hearing with notice to neighbors within 300 feet; notice to the Alamo Improvement Association, and notice to the Las Trampas Ridgeline Association. 6. Comply with the following 'construction, noise and dust control requirements: A. Noise generating construction.activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:30 a.m,to 6:00 p.ni., Monday through Friday, and shall.be prohibited on State and Federal holidays! The restrictions on allowed working days may be modified on prior written approval by the Zoning Administrator. ,2 i B. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion. engines with mufflers which are in good condition and to locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors and concrete pumpers as far away from existing residences as possible. C. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site that construction.work will commence. The notice shall include a list of contact persons with name, title, phone number and area of responsibility.) The person responsible for maintaining the list ,shall be included. The list shall be kept current at all times and shall consist of persons with authority to initiate corrective action.in their area of responsibility. The .names of the individuals responsible for noise and litter control shall be expressly identified in the notice. A copy of the notice shall be transmitted to the Community Development Department. The notice shall be. accompanied by a list of the names and address of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area noticed. 7. The applicant shall offer to dedicate a pedestrian trail easement along the property frontage to the East Bay Regional Park District in accord with Park District standards. 8. Comply with drainage, road improvement, traffic and utility requirements as follows: A. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the County Ordinance Code, this subdivision shall conform to the provisions of the County Subdivision Ordinance (Title 9). Any exceptions therefrom must be specifically listed in this conditional approval statement. Conformance with the Ordinance includes the following requirements: 1) Undergro�nding of all utility distribution facilities. ;i An excep�ion to this requirement is granted for the existing structures. 2) Conveying all storm waters entering or originating within the subject property,I without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage facility, to a natural watercourse having definable bed and banks or to an existing adequate storm drainage facility which conveys the storm waters to a natural watercourse. 3) Designing and constructing storm drainage facilities required by the Ordinance in compliance with specifications outlined in Division 914 of the Ordinance and in compliance with design standards of the Public Works Department. 4) Submitting a Parcel Map prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor. 3 f i 5) Submitting improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer, payment of review and inspection fees, and security for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code or the conditions of approval for this subdivision. B. Furnish proof to Ithe Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, that legal access to the property is available from the county maintained portion of Las Trampas Road. C. Furnish proof to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services"Division, of the acquisition of all necessary rights of entry, permits and/or easements for the construction of off-site, temporary or permanent, road and 'drainage improvements. D. Mitigate the impact of the additional storm water run-off from this development on San Ramon Creek by: 1) Removing 1 cubic yard of channel excavation material from the inadequate portion of San Ramon Creek near Chaney Road for each 50 Square feet of new impervious surface area created by the development. All excavated material shall be disposed of off-site by the developer at his cost. il he site selection, land rights, and construction staking will be by the Flood Control,District. E. Relinquish abutter's rights of access along the frontage of Las Trampas Road except for a single road access point approved by the Zoning Administrator. ADVISORY NOTES A. The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the Countywide Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Currently the fee for the Alamo region of the County is $2,201 for each added single family residence. , B. The applicant will be required to comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 13 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. 4 a C. Upon written 'request, the applicant may make .a cash payment in lieu of actual excavation and removal of material from the Creek. The cash payment will be calculated at the rate of $0.10 per square foot of new impervious surface area created by the development. The added impervious surface area created:by the development ' will be based on the Flood Control District's standard impervious surface area ordinance. The Flood Control District will use these funds to work on the Creek annually. BD/GA/df/jn ms10a:ms86-89c.bd 5/3/90 10/8/90 "I 10/17/90 (bos) . . 'i .. it i i 5