Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12171991 - 1.136 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSIONERS DATE: December 17, 1991 SUBJECT: Drainage Improvements in East Contra Costa County SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) &BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: DIRECT the Public Works Director and District Engineer of the Flood Control District to determine the public interest in forming an assessment district or some other equitable financial means to construct necessary drainage improvements in East Contra Costa County. II. Financiallmpact: No impact to the general fund. Some staff time will be involved in determining the public interest to form an assessment district. III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: A large part of the area in East Contra Costa County, and particularly that portion lying east of Marsh Creek, is low lying land that is subject to flooding during heavy rains. This area has no drainage infrastructure, no sewer system, and no water system other than wells. Approximately six years ago, in response to complaints from property owners in East Contra Costa County experiencing flooding during heavy rains, staff did two things: 1) Required all development east Continued on Attachment: SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON DEC 17 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS V111, UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RMA:fp:cl c:Bo.17.t12 Orig. Div: Public Works (RE) cc: County Administrator GMEDA Director Public Works -Road Engineering I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of -Flood Control an salon taken and entered on the minutes of the -Engineering Services - ` Board of Supervisors on ti dal� �wn. Community Development ATTESTED: DEC 1 PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator by � �?,L ,Deputy SUBJECT: Drainage Improvements in East Contra Costa County Page -2- 111111. Reasons for Recommendations and Background, cont.: of Marsh Creek to strictly adhere to the ordinance code provisions for collecting and conveying stormwaters to an adequate discharge point if the development resulted in parcels less than 10 acres in size. Staff felt that parcels greater than ten acres in size created an insignificant impact on the existing drainage patterns and this type of large parcel development could be allowed without requiring strict compliance with collect and convey. 2) Staff generated a cost estimate and proposal for the communities in East Contra Costa County to form an assessment district that would install the necessary drainage infrastructure to eliminate flooding and allow further development. At that time staff mailed out a notice and information packet to each property owner in the area and requested a response if they were interested in forming an assessment district. Staff received only one affirmative response to all the notices sent out and the proposal to proceed with the assessment district was dropped at that time. The East County Regional Planning Commission recently heard several minor subdivisions that were requesting approval of tentative maps with parcels less than ten acres in size. Staff pointed out to the Commission that it was inappropriate to approve minor subdivision requests with parcel sizes less than ten acres, unless the accompanying infrastructure is there to support this type of development. Not only are there no drainage facilities, but there is no sewer system in the area as well. All homes are on septic tanks. There are also no water facilities; all domestic water is obtained from wells. . Even the community of Knightsen, which recently constructed a new water system, derives its water supply from a well. Septic systems overflow and wells can become contaminated with a high water table and flooding. The road system of narrow rural roads in the area is also inadequate for denser development. The property owners pointed out that their land has not been farmed for some time and they have no recourse but to subdivide it so they can sell off a portion of the property or grant it to their children. The planning commissioners ultimately denied the minor subdivision applications on the appeal, but at the same time were concerned that property in the area could not develop further without the needed infrastructure. They felt that since the County General Plan has been approved with an urban limit line in place, the property owners in the area may now be interested in forming an assessment district to install the storm drainage facilities necessary to develop their property further. The Planning Commission then voted to recommend to the Board that staff be directed to determine if the communities in East County would be interested in forming an assessment district or some other financial mechanisms to install the drainage facilities. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: It will not be known if the communities in East County are interested in forming an assessment district to install the necessary drainage facilities for further development in the area.