Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12031991 - H.7 TO: BOklkp OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: Harvey E. Bra don► Dir of Community Development t .� ,. By: Dennis M. Barry, Deputy Director of Community Costa Development P _ County DATE: December 2/ 1991 SUBJECT: First Amended Development Agreement with A.J. Salomon SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS : 1 . APPROVE, and AUTHORIZE the Director of Community Development to sign, the Cancellation Agreement. 2 . REAFFIRM the Board' s certifications of July 10, 1990 and April 16 , 1991 that the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan and the Board' s certification of the Addenda thereto, REAFFIRM the Board' s adoption of findings related to the Specific Plan, and CERTIFY that the Final EIR and Addenda were. presented to the Board, and the Board considered the information contained in them, before the Board made a decision concerning the proposed First Amended Development Agreement with A. J. Salomon. 3 . WAIVE reading of the proposed ordinance. 4 . ADOPT the proposed ordinance approving the First Amended Development Agreement with A. J. Salomon. 5 . READOPT the Statement of Findings and Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring Program as approved on July 10, 1990 by Resolution No . 90/457 and the amendments thereto approved on April 16 , 1991 by Resolution 91/225, and the supplemental findings approved on November 5, 1991 . 6 . AUTHORIZE the Director of Community Development to sign the First Amended Development Agreement. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION This matter was heard by the Zoning Administrator on November 4 , 1991 . The Zoning Administrator found that the First Amended Development Agreement does not provide for any entitlements beyond the ability to rely on the General Plan and Specific Plan as stable legislation applicable to the subject property and that any applications for development entitlements would require an Initial Study for compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and a public hearing before the appropriate body of the County's Planning Agency. The Zoning Administrator found the environmental review for the First Amended Development Agreement to be adequate, consistent with the provisions of Section II of the proposed ordinance and the analysis therein and Section E of the Recitals in the First Amended Development Agreement. The Zoning Administrator recommends that the Board find that the First Amended Development Agreement is consistent with State law, County policy, development agreement procedures, the General Plan of Contra Costa County as approved January 29 , 1991 , and the Specific Plan for the Bethel Island Area as amended on April 16, 1991 . For the First Amended Development Agreement to be effective, the existing Development Agreement must be canceled, which is accomplished by the Cancellation Agreement. The First Amended Development Agreement is a new agreement, not an amendment to the existing Development Agreement . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:' YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON December 3 , 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER 1 . 1 �f This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the requests by A.J. Salomon and Dean S. Lesher for cancellation of existing Development Agreements and the recommendation of the Zoning Administrator on the requests by A.J. Salomon and Dean S. Lesher for review and approval of the First Amended Development Agreements relative to land located in the off-island area of the Bethel Island planning area. Supervisor Powers shared with Board members the request to speak card containing. written comments from Craig Ogden, 17 Cactus Lane, Oakley, on the location of his property. The following persons appeared to speak: Duncan M. Simmons, 1807 13th Street, Sacramento, Counsel representing the California State Lands Commission, spoke in opposition and outlined concerns presented in a letter from the State Lands Commission dated December 3 , 1991. Kathryn Dickson, 1970 Broadway, Suite 1045, Oakland, representing the Sierra Club, the Greenbelt Alliance, and the Mt. Diablo Audubon Society, spoke in opposition and presented written material for Board consideration. Raymond Zurfluh, 2616 Buena Vista Avenue, . Walnut Creek, declined to speak. Mark Armstrong, Gagen, McCoy, McMahon and Armstrong, 279 Front Street, Danville, representing Dean S. Lesher and A.J. Salomon, spoke in support of .the requests, pointing out several typographical errors that should be corrected. Dennis Barry, Community Development Department, responded to questions from 'the Board on the proposed agreements. Silvano Marchesi, Assistant County Counsel, commented on the agreements and advised that staff and the developers were amenable to the Board granting to Ms. Dickson additional time at this hearing for further testimony. Ms. Dickson presented further testimony. Supervisor Torlakson commented on the length of the process for the projects and he moved approval of the Development Agreements as amended with the typographical errors to be corrected. Supervisor McPeak seconded the motion and requested clarification on the affordable housing contribution, and clarification on the requested approval. Mr. Barry responded to Supervisor McPeak' s request. Supervisor Powers clarified that the motion was to close the hearing and approve the amended agreements, including the correction of typographical errors. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that recommendations 1 , 2, 3 , 4, 5, and 6 are APPROVED; and as to recommendation 4, Ordinance No. 91-57 is ADOPTED. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X_UNANIMOUS(ABSENT T T I AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN . AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: Community Development ATTESTED December 3 . 1991 all other distribution v i a PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Community Development SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel b BY OAVA DEPUTY M382 (10/88) 2 . ORDINANCE NO. 91-57 (A. J. Salomon First Amended Development Agreement) The Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa ordains as follows : SECTION I: The Board hereby finds that the First Amended Development Agreement between the County of Contra Costa and A. J. Salomon, relating to 687 acres of real property located on Hotchkiss Tract in the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan area, which is on file with the Clerk of the Board, and which has been recommended for approval by the County Zoning Administrator, is consistent with the County' s General Plan adopted on January 29, 1991 , and the Bethel Island Area Specific Plan as amended on April 16, 1991 . The First Amended Development Agreement supersedes the Development Agreement approved by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Ordinance No. 90-89 on October 2, 1990 . SECTION II : The Board finds, consistent with Government Code Section 65457 , or as otherwise provided by law, that the First Amended Development Agreement is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( "CEQA" ) . The First Amended Development Agreement is exempt under Government Code Section 65457 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15182 because it is consistent with the Specific Plan (development consistent with the First Amended Agreement by its terms must be consistent with the Specific Plan) for which an EIR has been previously certified. The law does not require the County to post or file any notice explaining that the First Amended Development Agreement is exempt from further environmental review. The Specific Plan Final Environmental Impact Report ( "Specific Plan Final EIR" ) was certified and Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation Monitoring Program, based upon review and consideration of the Specific Plan Final EIR, were. originally adopted for the Specific Plan by the Board of Supervisors on July 10, 1990 by Resolution Nos . 90/454 and 90/457 . Amendments to the Findings of Fact were approved by the Board of Supervisors on April 16, 1991 by Resolution 91/225, consistent with the amendments to the Specific Plan. Supplemental Findings were also approved on November 5, 1991 by Resolution No. 91/7.32 . The Board, as authorized by Government Code Section 65457, and through Public' Resources Code Section 21166 -and. CEQA Guideline Section 15182, has determined that no further environmental documentation is required_ for the First Amended Agreement in that: -(.i) this is a residential project within the meaning of Government Code Section 65457 'and CEQA: (ii) there are no changes proposed in the First Amended Development :-Agreement � -1- ORDINANCE N0. 91-57 which involve new significant environmental impacts not previously considered; (iii) no subsequent changes are anticipated to occur with respect to the circumstances under which development pursuant to this First Amended Agreement will be taken; and (iv) no new information has become or is expected to become available which will relate to significant effects not previously discussed; nor is there any information that mitigation measures or alternatives previously not found to be feasible or not previously considered would reduce any significant impact. In addition, the Board finds that no further environmental review is necessary since the Final EIR assessed the environmental impacts of development agreements consistent with the Specific Plan as amended, such as the First Amended Development Agreement, as indicated in Addendum Number Two to the Final EIR. The Board has reviewed the Specific Plan Final EIR and hereby concurs in and ratifies the previous certification that the Specific Plan Final EIR has been completed in accordance with CEQA and all state and County guidelines pertaining thereto. Mitigation measures were suggested in the Final EIR in order to minimize the adverse effects . The feasible mitigation measures suggested in the Final EIR were adopted, along with other mitigation measures and changes in the project, by the County. The First Amended Development Agreement is consistent with previous County actions as amended and its intent regarding the Subject Property, in "that it contemplates development consistent with the Specific Plan and/or the General Plan, and incorporates by reference all the terms and conditions which have been previously adopted by the County regarding development within the Bethel Island Planning Area . In the alternative, the Board finds that the First Amended Development Agreement is exempt from further CEQA review consistent with Public Resources Code Section 21083 .3 . The First Amended Development Agreement is consistent with the newly- adopted General Plan, for which an environmental impact report was certified ( "General Plan EIR" ) . The First Amended Agreement does not create any environmental effects that are peculiar to the subject property and that were not addressed as significant in the General Plan EIR. The First Amended Development Agreement simply provides a vehicle for future implementation of the General Plan and gives the County and the developer the assurance that they can rely on the policies, rules, and regulations in the General Plan through the term of the First Amended Agreement. No land use entitlements are provided beyond assuring stable General Plan policies,-:rules and regulations through the duration of the County development process for the Subject Property. Under -this alternative, the General Plan EIR provides for sufficient -2- ORDINANCE NO. 91 environmental review for the First Amended Agreement. Even if the Specific Plan is rescinded or set aside, its policies and content may be used as nonbinding guidelines for land use decisions in the Bethel Island Planning Area with the General Plan being the underlying legislative authority and direction for such decisions . Under such circumstance, the Specific. Plan EIR need not be relied on as a program EIR for future land use decisions in the Bethel Island Planning Area . A new EIR for development applications consistent with the General Plan would be required. The Board further finds that the First Amended Development Agreement simply reconfirms the parties' intentions and desire to implement the Specific Plan and/or the General Plan. Based on the foregoing statutes and other CEQA provisions, no further environmental review, notice, or other documentation is required at this time. SECTION III : The Board hereby approves, pursuant to the authorization provided in section 65864 et sect. of the California Government Code, the First Amended Development Agreement between the County of Contra Costa and A. J. Salomon. SECTION IV: If any section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such a decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The Board hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance irrespective of the unconstitutionality or invalidity of any other section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase. -3- ORDINANCB NO. 91-5 SECTION V: This ordinance- becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days of passage shall be published once with the names of supervisors voting for and against it in the- ANTIOCH DAILY LEDGER , a newspaper published in the County. PASSED on December 3, 1991 by the following votes. AYES: Supervisors Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson and Powers NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Schroder ABSTAIN: None ATTEST:_ PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors .and County Administrator S Y By: Depu Bbard Chair dM salomou.ord -4- ORDINANCB MO. 91-5 7 _ r-