HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01221991 - H.6 i
' r H. 6
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FRu#4' C I r-c,
Harvey E. Bragdon, - cx I
DATE: Director of Community Development
December 27, 1990 Coiv
SUBJECT:
Appeal of San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission Approval
of MS 25-90 (DeBolt Civil Enaineerina/Palmer Brown Madden)
SPECIFIC REQUEST S) OR RECORAWIENDAT1ON(5) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
Sustain the Approval decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission and Deny the Applicant's Appeal in accord
with Option A actions- listed below.
ALTERNATIVES
Option A - Deny, Appeal and Approve Project.
1. Accept the. environmental documentation as adequate.
2. Deny the Appeal.
3. Sustain the Approval of the Planning Commission.
4. Add the following sentence to Condition of Approval 115.B.
affecting alternative access routes to Parcel B:
"Alternatively, the Zoning Administrator may allow access to
Parcel B through the adjoining property to the west upon
showing of proof of access." ,
5. Adopt the Findings of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission as the basis for the Board's decision. •
Option B - Grant the Appeal and Approve Project.
1. Accept the environmental documentation as adequate.
2. Grant the 'Appeal.
3. Approve the project subject to the attached conditions with
the modifications listed below. Added wording is under-
lined. Deleted wording is overstruck with slash mark:
A. Modify Condition of Approval 110 to read as follows:
"Prior to issuance of the building permit for construc-
tion of a residence, the applicant shall submit
detailed plans of the proposed structure to the Zoning
Administrator for review and approval. Any home built
on the northwest Rlateau area shall not exceed 25 feet
in height from building pad. The Zoning Administrator
may ' impose siting, setback, landscape and additional
structure height restrictions to mitigate the impact of
the proposed development on off-site views once the
building pad is established."
B. Modify Condition of Approval #11 to read as follows:
"At least 30 days prior to MA64 /fit /160t9tox /0016 lot
issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
submit a grading/tree preservation plan for the review
and' approval of the Zoning Administrator. The plan
shall identify all trees with trunk sizes greater than
10 inches in diameter 4-1/2 feet from the base and
indicate whether or not the tree would be eliminated.
Grading of the site and removal of mature trees shall
be minimized. 11
ti
C. Add the following sentence to Condition of Approval
#15.B.:
"Provide a 25-foot non-exclusive access and utility
easement through Parcel A to Parcel B. Alternatively,
the Zoning Administrator may allow access to Parcel B
rough the adjoining orogerty to the west upon showing
of Proof of access. "
4. Direct the Director of Community Development to prepare
findings for the Board to adopt as the basis for the Board
action.
BACKGROUND
The application, was filed February 23, 1990. In April, the
owner, Palmer Brown Madden, presented the project to the Alamo
Improvement Association and received that group's qualified
support. The Association recommended that the County impose an
added height restriction similar to what has been imposed on
other hillside ; projects in the vicinity. The restriction is
aimed at minimizing the potential visibility of the building
site, Parcel B, that would be created by this subdivision. The
Association's position is described in a letter dated April 14 ,
1990.
The project was heard by the Zoning Administrator on September
17, 1990 at which time the project was approved for two parcels
subject to the height restriction requested by AIA.
The owner appealed the Zoning Administrator decision concerning
several points including the building height restriction. . The
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission heard the appli-
cant's appeal on November 7, 1990, at which time several other
parties spoke ` including a representative of AIA. After
concluding the hearing, the Commission voted to grant the appli-
cant's appeal regarding trail dedication (Condition of Approval
18) , scenic easement concerns (Condition of Approval #9) and made
a partial concession on the building height restriction
(Condition of Approval #10.b. ) . The Commission retained the
25-foot height,' limit, but allowed this measurement to be taken
from the finished building pad and eliminated a maximum altitude
(695 feet MSL) limit. Concomitantly, the Commission imposed
other site design controls to assure that potential impacts of
the future development on Parcel B on off-site views are miti-
gated.
On November 15, 1990 the owner filed an appeal of the
Commission's decision.
APPEAL TO BOARD
The owner's concerns are discussed in letters dated November 27,
December 14, and December 19, 1990. The concerns are several-
fold:
1. Parcel B `Site Design Controls - The discussion to-date has
concerned development in the plateau area in the northwest
corner of Parcel B. AIA, the Zoning Administrator and
Planning Commission have all placed a height restriction to
avoid potentially obtrusive development on this relatively
prominent portion of the site.
The owner has indicated that he may wish to site the resi-
dence in; an adjoining ("saddle") area that is lower in
elevation and less visible from the surrounding area.
Should he decide to site the building in this location, he
feels that application of the lower building height limit
would be' unreasonable. He feels that relaxation of the
height restriction for this portion of the site would not
adversely affect the scenic quality of the area, and
accordingly is asking that the height restriction be waived,
J
2 . Parcel B Alternative Access - The project originally was
proposing access to Parcel B through an adjoining property.
Then, the owner modified his plan to provide access to
Parcel B through his own site. This latter plan is the one
that was approved by the Planning Commission.
More recently, the owner has requested that the access
requirements be broadened to allow either access route.
3. Grading Plan - The owner objects to being required to
prepare a grading plan prior to recording a final map
(Condition of Approval 111) .
RESPONSE TO APPEAL ISSUES
1. Parcel B Site Design Controls - In the last several years,
the County has been consistently applying more restrictive
building height restrictions for Alamo hillside properties
than are permitted by application of zoning Height limits
alone. These restrictions are intended to not only minimize
view impacts but also to maintain a low-profile development
character for the area that more closely conforms to the
natural terrain. In this regard, the height restrictions
have been applied to less visible as well as highly
conspicuous building sites.
While the alternative (saddle) site is acknowledged to be
less prominent than the plateau area, . staff feels that the
site will still nonetheless be visible to a number of future
residences in the vicinity. Moreover, given the large
amount of acreage on which to develop, the restriction will
not be substantially detrimental to the development
potential of the property. In view of these considerations,
the site design controls as issued by the Planning
Commission should be sustained.
2 . Parcel B Alternative Access - It has been the Zoning
Administrator's intent to allow the applicant the latitude
to develop either access route. Therefore, staff has no
objection to modifying the access requirements as generally
requested.
3. Grading Plan - The reason that a grading plan has been
required at the parcel map stage is to assure that tree
preservation measures are considered prior to finalization
of road improvement designs.
CONCLUSION
The decision issued by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission should be generally sustained. No changes to the site
design control' and grading plan/tree preservation requirement
should be granted. Modification of the access requirements to
Parcel B should be allowed to permit the applicant the option of
pursuing one of two access routes.
In the event the Board of Supervisors finds that all of the
concerns of the appellant have merit and grants the applicant's
appeal, then the Board should direct staff to modify Conditions
of Approval 110.b. , #11, and 115 as described above under Option
B.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: ZYES SIGNATURE:
- RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMM TION O BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATUREISI:
ACTION OF BOARD ON January 22, 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
7
This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors for hearing of the appeal by DeBolt Civil Engineering from
the decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission
acting as the Board of Appeals on the request by DeBolt Civil
. Engineering (applicant) and Palmer Madden (owner) (MS 25-90) for
approval for a minor subdivision to divide 11 acres of land into two
parcels in the Alamo area.
Mary Fleming, Community Development Department, presented the
staff report, describing the site, the mitigated negative decaration,
areas of concern, the history of the appeal, and the Planning
Commission approval with modified conditions. Ms. Fleming advised of
the staff recommendation that the Board sustain the decision of the
Planning Commission, deny the appeal and approve the project as the
Planning Commission had approved it. She recommended that the Board
accept the Environmental documentation as adequate, sustain the
Planning Commission approval and add a sentence to condition #15b
relative to alternative access and adopt the findings of the Planning
Commission.
The public hearing was opened and the following person appeared
to speak:
Palmer Madden, 1900 Las Trampas Road, Alamo, commentedon his two
remaining objections on the siting of buildings and the geotechnical
work, and height restrictions. He requested changes to various
conditions relative to the timing of the geotechnical work required
and the height restriction.
The public hearing was closed.
Supervisor Schroder requested clarification of the requirement
for the geotechnical work being required, and the height restriction.
Karl Wandry, Community Development Department, responded to
Supervisor Schroder' s request commenting that the geotechnical work
could be done at the building permit stage, and that some higher
height might be allowed in the lower area if the applicant can show to
the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator, cross sections
addressing the concerns expressed by the Zoning Administrator and
Alamo Improvement Association.
Supervisor Schroder moved to sustain the decision of the Planning
Commission with the conditions as amended (Exhibit A attached) ,
granting the appeal as modified.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the appeal of Palmer Madden is
GRANTED with modification; and the Planning Commission approval of MS
25-90 is SUSTAINED as modified by the Board of Supervisors (Exhbit A
attached) .
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY TWAT THIS IS A TRUE
X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) APD CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TARN
AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SMWN.
cc: Community Development, ATTESTED January 22, 1991
Public Works -Steve Wright -
Palmer Brown Madden PHIL BATCHELOR. CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
DeBolt Civil Engineering SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Alamo Improvement Association
Assessor BY
M382 7-33 San Ramon Valley Fire _,DEPUTY
Protection Dist.
4.
EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 25-90
1. The request to subdivide the 10.9-acre parcel is approved for two parcels subject to
the vesting tentative map dated received by the Community Development Department
on July 2, 1990. The following conditions of approval require compliance prior to filing
of the parcel map unless otherwise indicated.
2. At least 60 days prior to recording a parcel map, issuance of Building Department
permits, or installation of improvements, submit a preliminary geology, soil and
foundation report based on existing information and subsurface investigation of the
parcel, meeting the requirements of Subdivision Ordinance Section 94-4.420, for
review and approval of the Planning Geologist. Report shall review landslide mapping
of government agencies and consultants.
3. Parcel'lines may be required to be adjusted to avoid crossing unstable soils which are
not to be improved; landslides shall not cross parcel lines except as approved by the
Zoning Administrator. Improvement, grading, and building plans shall carry out the
recommendations of the approved report.
4. Concurrently with recordation of the parcel map, record a statement to run with deeds
to the property acknowledging the report by title, author (firm), and date, calling
attention to recommendations, and noting that the report is on file in the Community
Development Department of Contra Costa County. Sellers of parcels of this
subdivision shall make the report available to prospective purchasers.
5. Prior to issuance of building permits, if landslide repair or soil improvement is required
to provide a stable building site or access, a final report of the engineering geologist
and geotechnical engineer shall be submitted showing the final plan and grades for any
installed subsurface drainage with pickup, cleanout, and disposal points; buttress fill
or shear key location, any retaining wall installed, and other soil improvements installed
during grading, all as surveyed by a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer as directed
by the geotechnical engineer.
6. Prior to issuance of building permits, if landslide repair is required to provide a stable
building site or access,a grading bond will be required for the work necessary. Provide
sufficient subsurface information to estimate the cost of repairs.
7. Prior to issuance of building permits on Parcel B, submit a letter from the consulting
engineering geologist and geotechnical engineer indicating that plans conform to
recommendations of the preliminary geology, soils, and foundation report and
supplements.
S. Dedicate a 20-foot wide trail easement to the East Bay Regional Park District along Las
Trampas Road and the westerly boundary of Parcels A and B per agreement between
East Bay Regional Park District and applicant, or at an alternate location agreed upon
by the applicant, East Bay Regional Park District, and approved by the Zoning
Administrator.
1
9. Prior to filing Parcel Map, submit a field survey and report performed by qualified
professionals to identify the migratory corridors of the Alameda Whipsnake. The report
shall identify the corridors and make recommendations for preserving them. No
structures or barrier style fencing shall be allowed in the corridors or any recommended
buffer area.
10. Prior to issuance of the building permit for construction of a residence, the applicant
shall submit detailed plans of the proposed structure to the Zoning Administrator for
review and approval not exceeding 25 feet in height from building pad or a 695'
elevation, whichever is higher. ultimate building is subject to review and approval of
the Zoning Administrator subject to the stated limitations. The Zoning Administrator
may impose siting, setback, landscape and additional structure height restrictions to
mitigate the impact of the proposed development on off-site views once the building
pad is established.
11. At least 30 days prior to issuance of a grading permit or building permit, the applicant
shall submit a grading/tree preservation plan for the review and approval of the Zoning
Administrator. The plan shall identify all trees with trunk sizes greater than 10 inches
in diameter 4 1/2 feet from the base and indicate whether or not the tree would be
eliminated. Grading of the site and removal of mature trees shall be minimized.
12. The applicant shall show proof that water and sewage service is available prior to
recording the parcel map.
13. Should archaeological materials be uncovered during grading,trenching or other on-site
excavation(s), earthwork within 30 yards of these materials shall be stopped until a
professional archaeologist who is certified by the Society for California Archaeology
(SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeologists (SOPA) has had an
opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate
mitigation(s), if deemed necessary.
14. The applicant shall dedicate to the County a scenic easement on the knoll on the
northeast side of the parcel, above 660-foot level, with an exception of minor
accessory structure subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. This
easement shall not prohibit construction of a road through this area, nor the
construction of one-story accessory structures such as a barn or garage; nor does it
affect in any way construction outside the area so deeded.
15. The following requirements pertaining to drainage, road, and utility improvements will
require the review and approval of the Public Works Department:
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:
2
1. Undergrounding of all utility distribution facilities. An exception to this
requirement is granted for the existing structures.
2. Street lighting is not required.
3. Conveying all storm waters entering or originating within the subject
property, 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. As these parcels are large and
agricultural in nature, additional run-off resulting from this subdivision
will be negligible. Therefore, an exception from this requirement is
granted provided the applicant maintains the existing drainage pattern
and does not dispose concentrated storm water run-off adjacent
property.
4. 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.
5. Submitting. a Parcel Map prepared by a registered civil engineer or
licensed land surveyor.
B. Provide a 25-foot non-exclusive access and utility easement through Parcel A
to Parcel B.
C. Provide a 25-foot access and utility easement along the northerly property line
of Parcel B, as shown on the Tentative Map.
D. Furnish proof to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division,
that legal access to the property is available from the County-maintained
portion of Las Trampas Road.
E. 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. The site selection, land rights, and construction staking will be
by the Flood Control District.
3
ADVISORY NOTES
This is a vesting tentative map. Any fees collected shall be those in effect at the time of
tentative map approval, not recordation of the parcel map.
A. The applicant/owner should be aware of the renewing requirements prior to recording
the parcel map or requesting building or grading permits.
B. Applicant shall comply with the Park Dedication Fee Ordinance.
C. Comply with the provisions of the Heritage Tree Ordinance adopted by the Board of
Supervisors.
D. Comply with the requirements of the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District (see
attached).
E. Comply with the requirements of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District (see
attached).
F. Comply, with the requirements of the Health Services Department, Environmental
Health Division.
G. Comply with the requirements of the Building Inspection Department. Building permits
are required prior to construction of most structures.
H. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Game.
The applicant should notify the Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 47,Yountville,
California 94599, of any proposed construction within the development that may
affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Game Code.
I. 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.
J. The applicant will be required to comply with the drainage fee requirements for
Drainage Area 13 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors.
K. Upon written request, the applicant may make a cash payment in lieu of actual
excavation and removal of material from San Ramon 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 San Ramon
Creek annually.
W/in
ws31:n*25.90e.rns
!129190
•16/90
9117/90.2A W
10/9190 Irw.)
11/7/90•SRVRPC
1/25191•bos
4
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
i- 5019 Imhoff Place Martinez. California 945534392 (415) •i FAX.(415)67&7211k
ROGER!'DOLAN
General Monoger
Chief Engineer
JAMES L HAZARD
Counsel toe the Olstncl
1415,
s1SI 438.1♦JO
JOYCE E.MCMILLAN
Secremry of the Obtnct
March 29, 1990
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
County Administration Bldg. , North Wing
,P.O. Box 951
Martinez, CA 94553
ATTENTION: MR`. STEVE CROSS ' = ,
Gentlemen:
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
MS 25-90
3 LOT SUBDIVISION
APN: 198-220-012
WS: 33
THOMAS BROS. LOC. : 77D5
The above referenced project has been reviewed by this office.
1. SEWER SERVICE AVAILABILITY AND GENERAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS
1.1 The project site is within the CCCSD boundaries, and
sewer service has been planned for this area.
1.2 The plans submitted for District review do not show the
proposed project sewers. The developer should be aware
that District policy requires gravity sewers in
preference to pumped systems and the location of public
sewers in public streets rather than in easements to the
extent possible. Variances . from this policy are
discouraged. However, the District will consider
alternatives on a case-by-case basis where the project
engineer justifies such alternatives to the District's
satisfaction.
Contra Costa county
Page 3
March 29, 1990
Sewer Project 4518.
Sewer Project 4518 is located in Las Trampas Road and
adjacent to proposed parcel IBI . This sewer project was
released for construction on November 29, 1988. The
developer for subdivision 6419 is responsible sponsible for
construction of the proposed sewer. Sewer Project 4518
will not be available for sewer service until the sewer
project is accepted by the District.
2. SOURCE CONTROL -REQUIREMENTS
The District has reviewed this project for source control
requirements. Base wastewater flow from this project appears
to be domestic wastewater such as from residential, school,
office, ' or church sources. Specific source control
requirements are normally not applicable to domestic
wastewater. However, materials such as gasoline, oil, sand,
paint, pesticide residues, or other toxic substances are
prohibited from being introduced into the District's sewer
system.
3. SEWER CAPACITY
The District has completed a limited analysis for the sewer
system downstream of the proposed project. This analysis
consisted of a review of District records for capacity
deficiencies and a determination that the proposed project
will generate less wastewater than our "trigger" for further
analysis. The existing main sewer is adequate for the
additional wastewater which will be generated by this project,
but District facilities farther downstream do not have
adequate flow carrying capacity'under the District's current
design criteria for ultimate conditions. Improvements to the
District's existing facilities that are required as a result
of new development will be funded from applicable District
fees and charges. The developer will be required to pay these
fees and charges at the time of connection to the sewer
system. : The Board of Directors adopted a' new system of
Facilities Capacity Fees on May 4, 1989. The Facilities
Capacity Fees will be phased in over a two-year period that
starts on July 1, 1989. Please telephone me at (415) 689-
3890, Ext. 364, if you need additional information on the
Facilities Capacity Fees.
Contra Costa county
Page 5
March 29, 1990
The Sanitary District must review and approve any construction
plans involving work on the public sewer system prior to the
developer's applying for a building permit. The District's Permit
Section will receive and process the construction plans.
Sincerely,
Jack H. Case
Associate Engineer
JHC:vh
Enclosure
cc: De Bolt Civil Engineering
811 San Ramon Valley Blvd.
Danville, CA 94526
Mr. Palmer Madden
1900 Las Trampas Road
Alamo, CA 94507
CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT
PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED FOR
DESIGNING SEWERS TO BE LOCATED IN HILLSIDE AND CREEK AREAS
1. Soils reports will be required where:
a. Slopes of hills where sewers are proposed for installation
exceed 15 percent.
b. Sewers are proposed for installation within fifty feet of
creekbeds.
c. Sewers are' proposed for installation within the range of
influence of a possible landslide from adjacent hill .
d. Sewers are proposed for installation in historical slide
locations.
2. A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer practicing in
Geotechnical Engineering must be submitted by the job engineer which
covers the proposed project.
3. If the project geotechnical report provided does not cover an
off-roadsewer alignment, the District may require a supplementary
report. This report, at a minimum, must address the following:
a. Supplementary geological setting, general soils and bedrock
conditions along the proposed sewer alignment, and recommended
set backs from slides and creeks.
b. Stability or instability of selected sewer alignment.
c. Potential ground water problems.
d. Effect of trenching on slope stability (negative impacts on
slope).
e. Special backfill, special trenching requirements, or special
supports that may be recommended.
f. . Erosion potential of soils around sewer near water courses.
g. Recommended corrections if an instability exists or may
develop.
4. Installation of sewers in unrepaired slide areas is to be avoided.
a. If an acceptable gravity route is feasible around the
unrepaired slide, the sewer must be installed around the slide.
DESIGN STANDARDS
APPLICABLE TO
SEWERS WHICH ARE TO BE LOCATED IN HILLSIDE AND
CREEK AREAS
I. Sewers to be installed across hillside slopes (generally parallel to
contours) shall be ductile iron (no bedding) if the cross slope of
the hill exceeds 25 percent.
2. Sewers to be installed parallel to defined creeks shall be located
no closer than twenty feet from the top of the bank if the creek
bank is defined; if not, no closer than thirty feet from the
centerline of the creek.
1
3. Sewers to be installed parallel to defined creeks from twenty to
fifty feet away from the top of the bank shall be ductile Iron (no
bedding) .
4. Manholes to be installed on either ends of creek crossings shall be
located no closer than twenty feet from the top of the creek bank.
(^� y' Harvey E. Bragdon )� —
ommunity ontI � Director of Community Development
Development Costa
Department 1
County Administration Building County 1 W
651 Pine Street
4th Floor. North Wing f,;. MAR 0 7 1990
Martinez, California 94553.0095
Phone: ,. ,:r '-p�'' SR.VALLEY EIRE DIST.
Date:
AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST
We request your, comment regarding the attached application currently under
review.
_? Co Z/A; Dev Engr; Co Geog
CONCERNED AGENCIES: Please submit your comments as follows:
,,8uilding Inspection
,,,Environmental Health Project Planner <;I_V£
,,.P/W - Flood Control
-,-P/W - Road Engi neerllatl County File #
--Fire District a 'A" „
-'Sanitary District .vrQQt . Prior to
---Water District
—'Nearby City ji. I..,;f7 We have found the following special programs
West Pittsburg Alliance apply to this application:
.,Alamo Improvement Assoc.
Oakley Municipal Adv Com .y Active Fault Zone
---Anthropology Lab (UC Sonoma)
Flood Hazard Zone
COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION:.
/ !� rO 60 dBA Noise Control
rClrlt . &,e "Zf
Within 2,000' of Hazardous Waste
Site
Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by law or
ordinance.
Comments: NO COMMENTS ON THIS
APPLICATION.
OUR COMMENTS ARE
ATTACHED.
Signat e
�(�",•tax.. ji' ,i' �'
Agency
Date
c:form.tb
I