HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11191991 - H.9 H.9
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on November 19, 1991 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson and Powers
NOES: Supervisor McPeak
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeals by Alamo Citizens for Responsible
Growth and the Alamo Improvement Association on Final
Development Plan 3030-90 and Subdivision 7553, Bryan &
Murphy Assoc. , Inc. and Alamo Summit, Inc. in the Alamo
Area.
This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors for hearing on the appeal by Alamo Citizens for
Responsible Growth and Alamo Improvement Association from the decision
of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission on the request by
Bryan & Murphy Associates, Inc. (applicant) and Alamo Summit, Inc.
(owner) for Final Development Plan 3030-90 approval for a 37 unit
single family residential project, and a request for vesting tentative
map approval for Subdivision 7553 to subdivide 176 acres into 37 lots
in the Alamo area.
Dennis Barry, Community Development Department, presented the
staff report on the proposed project and the staff recommendation that
the Board deny the appeal, sustain the approval of the San Ramon
Valley Planning Commission and direct staff to prepare findings for
adoption by the Board.
The following persons appeared to speak:
Richard Clark, 156 Diablo Road, #203 , Danville, representing
Alamo Summit, Inc. , requested that the Board deny the appeal and make
two minor changes to the conditions of approval that were imposed on
the project by the San Ramon Valley Planning Commission.
Dan Curtin, McCutcheon, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, 1331 N.
California Boulevard, Walnut Creek, representing Alamo Summit, Inc. ,
summarized the proposed project and commented on the two minor
modifications outlined in a letter to the Board dated November 13 ,
1991 relative to the tree canopy area and recognizing in Condition 21
the existing agreement between the applicant and the R-7A relating to
trails.
Edward Shaffer, McCutcheon, Doyle, Brown & Enersen, 1331 N.
California Boulevard, Walnut Creek, representing Alamo Summit, Inc. ,
commented on issues including benefits of the project to surrounding
neighborhoods and fire safety.
Paul Ward, 264 Castle Crest Road, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition to the project on concerns including access, fire safety,
and security gates.
Michael Gibson, 70 Sara Lane, Walnut Creek, representing Alamo
Improvement Association, spoke in support of the appeal on concerns
including visual impacts, geologic impacts, architectural review,
development rights, clustering, General Plan policies, slide repairs,
and open space.
Zack Cowan, 655 Sutter Street, Ste. 200, San Francisco,
representing Alamo Improvement Association and Alamo Citizens for
Responsible Growth, spoke in support of the appeal and commented on
issues including a September 24, 1991 letter to the Planning
.1
Commission and the relationship of the proposed project to the
Rossmoor development, clustering, and visual impacts.
Oliver T. Smith, 2031 Ridgewood Road, Alamo, spoke in opposition
to the project on concerns including access and road safety and fire
safety.
Dorothy Combs, 2160 Ridgewood, Alamo, spoke in opposition to the
proposed project on the issue of fire safety.
The applicant spoke in rebuttal.
The public hearing was closed.
Supervisor Schroder commented on the proposed project addressing
concerns that had been raised and he moved the staff recommendation
with consistency relative to using the tree canopy area and the trails
in the area being in conformance with the R-7A agreement.
Supervisor Torlakson seconded the motion and he requested comment
from staff on an additional trail access other than what has been
granted as R-7A.
Robert Drake responded to Supervisor Torlakson' s request.
Supervisor McPeak offered the applicant the opportunity to
participate in the voluntary contribution to the homeless program.
The applicant responded that they would be happy to continue to
discuss the issue.
Supervisor Torlakson requested an involvement or notification of
the community group in the surrounding area relative to the design
review.
Supervisor Powers clarified that the motion would be to declare
intent to approve the proposed project with the tree canopy
modification and the R-7A modification.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the Board of Supervisors DECLARES
ITS INTENT to deny the appeal of the Alamo Improvement Association and
the Alamo Citizens for Responsible Growth and sustain the approval
decision of the San Ramon Valley Planning Commission with conditions
as amended by the Board of Supervisors and staff is DIRECTED to
prepare the appropriate documentation for Board consideration.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of S isors on th date shown.
ATTESTED: �r —19`T 15
PHIL BATC�HELOwR,-0lerk of the Board
0of Supervi T and County ministrator
o
By ,Deouty
cc: Community Development Dept.
County Counsel
Alamo Summit, Inc.
Alamo Citizens for Responsible Growth &
Alamo Improvement Association
c/o Zach Cowan