HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02231993 - H.6 H. 6
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on February 23 , 1993 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Smith, Bishop, McPeak and Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Powers
ABSTAIN: None
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Hearing On Appeal Of Robert And Karen Santos From Contra
Costa County Planning Commission Decision On MS 19-91,
Schell and Martin, Inc. and Bob and Karen Santos, In The
Alhambra Valley Area.
Now is the time heretofore noticed for hearing on the appeal of
Robert and Karen Santos from the decision of the Contra Costa County
Planning Commission Board of Appeals on the request to subdivide 2. 27
acres of land into 3 lots with variances requested for a 60 foot lot
depth on Parcel B ( 120 feet required) , Schell and Martin, Inc.
(applicant) and Bob and Karen Santos (owners) (MS 19-91 ) in the
Alhambra Valley area.
Dennis Barry, Community Development Department, advised the Board
of a request by the applicant to continue this matter for one month to
March 23 , 1993 to work with staff to modify the proposal to make it
more acceptable, and since staff has not had a chance to look at that
proposal, he recommended that the Board continue the matter to March
23 , 1993 .
Supervisor Smith advised that he would be unable to attend the
March 23 , 1993 Board meeting.
After discussion by the Board of a date for a continuance, IT IS
BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the above matter is CONTINUED
to April 6, 1993 at 2: 00 p.m.
1 hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supe is ra on the date shown.
Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board ATTESTED:
cc: Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, Jerk of the Board
County Counsel f Super rs and CotMinIstrator
File list
0
By A ,Deputy
a - A3-13 14 L
A P P E A L - MINOR SUBDIVISION #19-91
SCHELL & MARTIN, INC. (APPLICANT)
BOB & KAREN SANTOS (OmERS)
THE APPLICANT AND OWNER REQUEST APPROVAL TO SUBDIVIDE 2.27 ACRES INTO
THREE (3) LOTS.
VARIANCES ARE REQUESTED FOR A60-FT., LOT .DEPTH ON PARCEL B (120-FT.,
REQUIRED) .
SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON BROOKWOOD DRIVE, APPROXIMATELY 9M-FT.,
SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF RELIEZ VALLEY ROAD AND BROOKWOOD DRIVE,
ALI MBRA: VALLEY AREA.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
23 FEBRUARY 1993 - 2;00 P.M.
t
7. Contra
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS f-%
-%--Ia
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON COUtty
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DATE: 22 January 1993
SUBJECT: APPEAL - Minor Subdivision 819-91, Schell & Martin (Applicants)
Bob & Karen Santos (Owners) -MS 819-91 - To divide 2.27 acres
into three (3) parcels - Alhambra Valley Area. (S.D. II) .
---------------
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Uphold the County Planning Commission's decision, DENY the
appeal.
2. Adopt the County Planning Commission's findings as the basis
for your Board's decision, attached hereto as Exhibit A and
incorporated herein by reference.
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS:
Background for this item is contained in the May 4, 1992 staff
report to the County Zoning Administrator and the October 13, 1992
staff report to the County Planning Commission, Exhibit B to this
order.
At the Planning Commission hearing, the applicant testified that
the proposed subdivision complied with the General Plan and that
the denial decision by the Zoning Administrator was arbitrary.
The Planning Commission denied the appeal of the applicant on the
basis the proposed subdivision does not comply with the General
Plan, Agricultural Lands designation and subdividing the property
into three (3) parcels was* not justified due to the requested
variances.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: M, YES SIGNATOR
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDAftON OF tBO D COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATORE(S) s
ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT _ TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: _ MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED
cc: Public Works Department PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
Schell & Martin THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Robert & Karen Santos AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY , DEPUTY
t
2
MS #19-91 - Continued:
The applicant, following the Planning Commission's decision,
requested a re-interpretation of the General Plan designation. The
Community Development Dept. , re-reviewed the General Plan designa-
tion, and interpreted it to be Agricultural Lands on the 1991
County General Plan and the Alhambra Valley Specific Plan (Exhibit
C) . Staff's original interpretation of a split designation of
Single Family Residential Low Density and Agricultural Lands, was
partially in error. However, either interpretation would require
a minimum of 5-acres to subdivide.
ISSUES RAISED BY THE APPEAL:
The decision to deny MS 19-91 was appealed by Mr. Bob Santos. The
letter of appeal is attached as Exhibit D. Mr. Santos' grounds for
appeal and the Staff response are as follows:
A. (1) Summary of appellant's statement: The appellant states
that he met all the conditions which they had been requested
to meet by the Zoning Administrator.
(2) Staff Response: The applicant was notified on July 8, 1991
that it may be in his best interests to withdraw the appli-
cation due to the substantial variances involved. The appli-
cant indicated on July 25, 1991, that he wished to proceed
with the application.
Staff prepared a Negative Declaration of Environmental
Significance with mitigation measures should the project be
approved. In accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act, the applicant is required to agree to the
mitigation measures prior to the proposed Negative Declara-
tion being released for public review.
B. (1) Summary of Appellant's Statement: The applicant states
denial of the permit was arbitrary and discriminatory.
(2) Staff Response: The Zoning Administrator's decision
reflected the recognition that the subject property is desig-
nated Agricultural Lands by the 1991 General Plan and the re-
quested subdivision to two 25,000 sq.ft.,parcels and one (1)
40,000 sq.ft. parcel does not comply with the General Plan.
Furthermore, a creek traverses the western portion of the
subject property and 20-ft. access easement along the eastern
boundary. The creek structure setback as required by Section
914.14 of the Ordinance Code would reduce the buildable area
of the parcels substantially not providing an adequate build-
ing site if the two existing homes were lost due to fire or
creek instability.
C. (1) Summary of the Appellant's Statement: The appellant states
subdivision provides the greatest benefit to the County in
terms of fees and taxes and is appropriate for the locality
and surrounding areas.
(2) Staff Response: No information has been provided to deter-
mine that the project would be a benefit to the County in
terms of fees and taxes.
CONCLUSION•
The Planning Commission's decision denying this subdivision
recognized that the request does not comply with the County General
Plan and the subject property is not suitable for the type of
development proposed.
NOTIFICATION LIST - APPEAL - MS n19-Jl - ROBERT & KAREN SANTOS
SCHELL & MARTIN, INC.
= MT. DIABLO EoULEvARD
LAFAYETTE, CALIFORNIA 9454
ROBERT & KAREN SANTOS
1050 FERNDALE FOAD
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553
ALHAMBRA VALLEY IMPROVEMENT
ASSOCIATION
ATTN: HAL CLSON, PRESIDENT
.RT'INEZ,�V6LIFORNIA 94553
EAST BAY REGIONAL PARK DIST.
P. 0, Box 5381
OAKLAND, CALIF. 94605
ATTN: LINDA PRATT
KENNETH DONALD RUDD
2635 RELIEZ VALLEY ROAD
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553
MELVIN & LILLIE CURRENT
2615 RELIEZ VALLEY ROAD
r-lARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553
THOMAS H. GRIFFIN TRUST
2647 RELIEZ VALLEY ROAD
•MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553
JAMES K. HI LDR ETHTRUST
2052 - 4TH AVENUE
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 921.01
STANLEY & CHARLOTTE GRAHAM
2569 RELIEZ VALLEY ROAD
MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94552
BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPEALS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
APPEAL - Schell & Martin (Applicant)
Robert & Karen Santos (Owners) Resolution #66-1992
MS 19-91, Alhambra Valley Area (S.D.II)
WHEREAS, an application by SCHELL & MARTIN (Applicants) ,
ROBERT & KAREN SANTOS (Owners) , (M.S. 19-91) , requesting approval
to divide 2 . 27 acres into three (3) lots with variance for a 60-
ft. , lot depth on Parcel B (120-ft. , required) , was received by the
Community Development Department on April 10, 1992; and
WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act, a Negative Declaration of En-
vironmental Significance was issued on September 5, 1991; and
WHEREAS, after notice thereof having been given, a public
hearing was scheduled before the County Zoning Administrator for
March 23 , 1992, April 20, 1992 and May 4, 1992 , whereat all persons
interested therein might appear and be heard; and
WHEREAS, on May 4, 1992 , the Zoning Administrator having fully
reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence
submitted in this matter; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Zoning Administrator
DENIED the minor subdivision application of SCHELL & MARTIN/ROBERT
& KAREN SANTOS (MS 19-91) , to divide 2.27 acres into three (3) lots
with variance for a 60-ft. , lot depth on Parcel B in that:
A. The subdivision as proposed does not comply with the
General Plan as required by Government Code #66474.61 (a)
of the Subdivision Map Act; and
B. The subject property is not physically suitable for the
type of development (Government Code #667474.61 (c) ; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on May 14, 1992, the owners,
ROBERT & KAREN SANTOS, appealed the Zoning Administrator's decision
to the Board of Appeals (Planning Commission) for public hearing
and determination; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on Tuesday, October 13, 1992, the
County Planning Commission sitting as the Board of Appeals DENIED
the appeal of Robert and Karen Santos upholding the decision and
reasons of the Zoning Administrator by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners - Frakes, Clark, Accornero, Gaddis,
Sakai, Woo, Terrell.
Resolution No. 66-1992
NOES: Commissioners - None.
ABSENT: Commissioners - None.
ABSTAIN: Commissioners - None.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that on October 22, 1992, Robert &
Karen Santos (Owners) , appealed the decision of the Board of
Appeals to the Board of Supervisors for public hearing and
determination.
MARVIN J. TERRELL
Chairman of the Planning Commission,
AE.
ounty, State of Calif.
19 November 1992 ATTEST:
don, Secretary of the
ission - Contra Costa
of California.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 19-91
1. The request to subdivide the 2.27 acres parcel is approved for two (2) parcels subject
to a revised tentative map being submitted for review and approval of the Zoning
Administrator per staff study dated April 8, 1992. Parcel A shall have a minimum of
20,000 square feet. The following conditions of approval require compliance prior to
the filing of the Parcel Map unless otherwise indicated.
2. 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 Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity
to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation(s), if deemed
necessary.
3. Where a lot/parcel is located within 300 feet of a high voltage electric transmission
line, the applicant shall record the following notice:
"The subject property is located near a high voltage electric transmission line.
Purchasers should be aware that there is ongoing research on possible potential
adverse health effects caused by the exposure to a magnetic field generated by
high voltage lines. Although much more research is needed before the question
of whether magnetic fields actually cause adverse health effects can be
resolved, the basis for such an hypothesis is established. At this time no risk
assessment has been made."
When a Final Subdivision Public Report issued by the California Department.of Real
Estate is required, the applicant shall also request that the Department of Real Estate
insert the above note in the report.
4. The applicant shall show proof that water and sewage service is available prior to
recording the Parcel Map.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for Parcel B, the two existing structures and leach
fields shall be removed.
6. Septic tanks, leach fields, and wells for the new homes shall not be allowed on East
Bay Regional Park District land.
7. Development plans for each building site shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning
Administrator at least 30 days prior to issuance of building permits. Homes and other
large structures shall be designed and placed to minimize the visual impact from
adjoining properties or roadways. All structures shall have non-flammable roofs and
fire retardant or non-flammable siding. All out-buildings shall have adequate spacing
from residences.
8. Prior to filing the Parcel Map, comply with the policy criteria for subdivision of lands
within agriculture and open space General Plan categories adopted by the Board of
Supervisors March 15, 1983 and included in the Contra Costa County General Plan
adopted January, 1991.
2.
A. Each parcel must have an "on-site" producing water well or install a "test well"
having a minimum yield of three gallons per minute with bacterial and chemical
quality in compliance with the State standards for a pure, wholesome and
potable water supply (Title 11, Section 6443). If the chemical analysis exceeds
the State standards for "maximum contaminant levels", for water potability, a
statement must be attached and "run with the property deed" advising of these
levels; or
B. Have verifiable water availability data from adjacent parcels presented by the
applicant or knowledge of the same, known by the Health Services Department
concerning water quality and quantity per A. above; and
Have a statement that "attaches and runs with the deed" indicating that a
water well shall be installed on the subject parcel complying with the general
requirements stated above prior to obtaining a Building Inspection Department
permit for construction.
C. In addition to the above, a hydro-geological evaluation maybe required in
known or suspected water short areas. This will include seasonal as well as
yearly variations. '
D. The land must be suitable for septic tank use according to the County
Ordinance Code criteria and Health Services Department regulations.
Percolation tests must be passed on all proposed lots prior to filing of the Parcel
Map.
E. Adequate fencing of an inconspicuous design shall be required to contain
domestic animals with all gates to be closeable by a nearby rancher/farmer
when necessary. Fencing shall be installed prior to issuance of building
permits.
9. When the existing structures are removed from Parcel B, the applicant shall dedicate
the creek structure setback area, in the form of a scenic easement to the County.
10. Comply with the requirements of Buller Group, Inc. Geotechnical Investigation dated
December 3, 1991 .
11. 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:
3.
1) Constructing a paved turnaround at the end of the proposed private
road.
2) Install all new utility distribution services underground.
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 storm drainage facility which conveys the storm waters to
a natural watercourse.
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.
Verifying that all finished floor elevations are above the 100-year flood
elevation.
4) Relinquishing "development rights" over that portion of the site that is
within the structure setback area of Alhambra Creek. The structure
setback area shall be determined by using the criteria outlined in Chapter
914-14, "Rights of Way and Setbacks", of the Subdivision Ordinance.
The existing homes and one garage per home can be excluded from this
structural setback area provided that:
a) There is a deed notification stating that no expansion shall be
permitted for the residences or the garages.
b) That no encroachment shall be permitted within the structural
setback area.
c) The property owner executes a hold harmless agreement holding
the County harmless in case of any damage to the structures
allowed to remain within the creek structural setback area.
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. These plans shall include any necessary
traffic signage and striping plans for review by the County Traffic
Engineer.
4.
6) Submitting a Parcel Map prepared by a registered civil engineer or
licensed land surveyor.
B. Provide for adequate corner sight distance at Reliez Valley Road in accordance
with CALTRANS standards for 40 mph.
C. Construct a 16-foot paved private roadway (with two-foot gravel shoulders) to
County private road standards, within a 25-foot easement, for that portion of
the access road which will serve more than one parcel in this proposed
subdivision.
D. Construct a 16-foot paved private road (with two-foot gravel shoulders) to
County private road standards from Reliez Valley Road to the subject property.
E. Furnish proof to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division,
that legal access to the property is available from Reliez Valley Road.
F. 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.
G. Provide a 20-foot public access easement for non-motorized use (pedestrians,
bicyclists, equestrians, etc.)along the existing roadway (running approximately
north and south parallel to Alhambra Creek)and along the northern property line
within the existing 20-foot access and utilities easement, to the satisfaction of
the Public Works Department, Road Engineering Division and the East Bay
Regional Park District.
H. Execute a recordable agreement which states that the developer and the owner
and the future owners of the property will hold harmless Contra Costa County
and the Flood Control District in the event of damage to the on-site
improvements as a result of creek-bank failure or erosion.
I. Contribute $17,000 per lot as the developments fair share of the area's
infrastructure needs. Full credit towards this contribution will be allowed for
the following:
1) Fire Facilities Contributions;
2) Park Dedication Fee (City and County);
3) Road Improvements/Contributions (City and County);
4) Drainage Mitigation Contribution/Improvements;
5.
5) Any partial Specific Plan Contributions; and
6) Domestic Water Supply (pump stations, reservoirs, and mains to
reservoirs).
Whether any other domestic water supply construction costs will be considered
part of the Specific Plan area's infrastructure costs will be determined as part
of the Specific Plan review and determination process.
If the developer's costs of construction of Specific Plan infrastructure
improvements are less than $17,000 per lot, then the balance shall be paid into
interest bearing trust account for Specific Plan infrastructure improvements to
be established by the County. Payment must be made when so directed by the
Public Works Department. If the final determination for infrastructure costs per
lot under the Specific Plan is less than $17,000, then the developer shall
receive a credit for cash contributions to the trust fund, which reflect the
difference between 517,000 and the final determination of infrastructure costs
per lot, with accrued interest. If the developer's construction costs for
infrastructure improvements exceed $17,000 per lot, and there is no cash
contribution to the infrastructure fund, then no reimbursement will be provided
to the developer.
The $17,000 fee was established in 1985. This fee shall be adjusted annually
beginning January 1, 1986, to reflect the amount of increase in the Bay Area
consumer Price Construction Cost Index using as a base that Index as of
January 1, 1985.
ADVISORY NOTES
A. The project lies within the 100-year flood boundary as designated on the Federal
Emergency Flood Rate Maps. The applicant should be aware of the requirements of
the Federal Flood Insurance Program and the County Flood Plain Management
Ordinance (Ordinance No. 87-65) as they pertain to future construction of any
structures on this property.
B. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish & Game.
It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish & Game, P.O. Box
47,Yountville, California 94599,of any proposed construction within this development
that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish & Game Code.
C. This project may also be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers.
The applicant should notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to
determine if a permit is required and if it can be obtained.
D. Applicant shall comply with the Park Dedication Fee Ordinance.
6.
E. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Consolidated 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 the construction of most structures.
DD/aa
MSXVIII/19-91 C.DD
4/10/92
E.
Community Contra Harvey of Bragdon
Director of Community Development
Development Costa
Department County
County Administration Building
651 Pine Street
4th Floor, North Wing ..�-•:-• .-•••..o„
Martinez, California 94553-0095
Phone: 646-2031 �► 4 November 2, 1992
W
William Campisi, Jr.
2000 Center Street, Suite 300
Berkeley, CA 94704
Dear Mr. Campisi:
This letter acknowledges receipt of your letter of appeal dated October 22, 1992 for application
#MS19-91, which was denied by the County Planning Commission on October 13, 1992.
Your appeal will be heard by the Board of Supervisors. You will be notified by the Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors when the appeal has been scheduled for hearing before the Board. You should be
aware that you or your representative should be present at the hearing.
Also, please note that in order to proceed promptly with the scheduling of this appeal, you should
submit a list of names and addresses for the applicant and owner of the application and all properties
within 300 feet of the property along with stamps and mailing labels for each individual property
owner, no later than November 23. 1992. Please direct the labels, stamps and list to: Community
Development Department, Attention: Debbie Drennan, 651 Pine Street, North Wing - 4th Floor,
Martinez, CA 94553-0095.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call Debbie Drennan at 646-2031.
Sincerely yours,
'01 al 4'&
Mary Fleming
Chief of Land Development
:df
L2:MS 19-91.bos
cc: File
Robert & Karen Santos
Public Works
Schell & Martin
Leonard Vecchi
UAW OFFICE OF }
WILLIAM CAMPISI , JR.
2000 CENTER STREET. SUITE 300
BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 94704 12 0^T .�
y t 2V P :,
4,
(510) 5.49-3112
FAX (510) 549-9260 '-
t
EL MICNI V - i
44 tGs�qq
October 22, 1992
Phil Bachelor
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
of Contra Costa County
651 Pine
Martinez, CA
Re: Appeal of Planning Commission Denial of Proposed Subdivision
Dear Mr. Bachelor,
I represent Robert and Karen Santos of 1050 Ferndale Road,
Martinez, California. On May 4, 1992 the Zoning department of the
County of Contra Costa denied the proposed subdivision of property
owned by Mr. and Mrs. Santos near the intersection of Reliez Valley
Road and Brookwood Road, A.P.N. 365-15--033, in an unincorporated
area of the County. On October 13, 1992 the planning commission
also denied this proposed subdivision.
On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Santos I request a hearing before
the Board of Supervisors to appeal the decision of the planning
commission. The appeal will be based on the grounds that the
Santos had met all zoning requirements then existing and had met
all the conditions which they had been requested to meet by the
Zoning department; that the denial of the permit was arbitrary and
discriminatory; and that allowing the subdivision provides the
greatest benefit to the County in terms of fees and taxes and is
appropriate for the locality and surrounding areas.
::e are in the process of requesting that transcripts of the
zoning and planning commission meetings be prepared for use at this
hearing. In view of the time this might take can you set an
appropriate date for a hearing on the appeal of this matter?
Yours very tr y,
1aam a pis ' J
WCJ/ng
cc: Robert and Karen Santos
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Date: November 16, 1992
TO: Byron Turner, Chief of Land Development - Current Plannjng
FROM: Jim Cutler, Assistant Director - Advance Planning 1�_
SUBJECT: General Plan Interpretation for the Santos Subdivision (MS19-91)
On October 6, 1992, the Board of Supervisors adopted the Alhambra Valley Specific Plan. The
primary intent of the specific plan is to establish both hillside and creek protections in the valley.
The land use map which was adopted also provided more detail about land use designation
boundaries and a more detailed interpretation of the alignment of the County's Urban Limit Line.
General Plan Interpretation -The location of the proposed Santos Subdivision (MS 19-91) is located
in an area which is generally used for agricultural purposes and has a General Plan/Specific Plan land
use designation of Agricultural Lands (AL), which establishes a minimum five acre parcel
requirement for the purposes of future subdivision. The County General Plan contains a thorough
discussion about proposed subdivision on lands which come under the AL designation.
State law ensures that one residence can be constructed on this site, if one does not already exist. The
applicant should be aware, however, of the new specific plan requirements which relate to slopes,
creek protections, preservation of natural features and other standards.
Relationship to the Urban Limit Line - In addition, the site is located outside the newly adopted Urban
Limit Line. The Urban Limit Line was adopted into law by the voters of Contra Costa County in
November 1990 and integrated into the County General Plan. The Urban Limit Line prohibits any
general plan amendments which would lead to urban development outside this boundary. The
boundary for Urban Limit Line as it relates to this site is the creek, which is the western boundary of
the subject property. What this means for this property is that the County is prohibited from even
considering a general plan amendment to change the existing land use designation to Single Family
Residential, Low Density, which would allow the proposed R-20 subdivision.
Relationship to the Briones Agricultural Preservation Agreement- The subject site is also within the
Briones Agricultural Preservation area, which prohibits the extension of urban services (water lines,
sanitary sewer lines, etc.) into the area.
cc:
File
D.Drennan-Curtent Planning
M.Tomas-Advance Planning
t t ,
E A S T B A Y BOARD OFDIRECMRS
lames H.Duncan.Prrsrdrnt
Harian Kessel,Via Pneadeet
EGIONAL PARKS Mary lse Wfir s,Saeremy
Jocelyn combo.Tris=m
Oliver Holme
John O'Donnell
Ted Rage
Pat O'Brien
July 16, 1991 `ffwnd 'owwr
Ms. Candi Wensley
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
651 Pine Street
4th Floor, North Wing
Martinez, Ca. 94553-0095
. RE: Briones Regional Park - Santos Property MS 19-91
Dear Ms. Wensley:
The Santos property is located north west of a portion of Briones Regional Park. This
adjacent park area is used for agriculture. The Santos property has two existing houses.
The water source for these home sites is from a spring within Briones Regional Park. The
septic fields are on Park District land, which were in existence at the time of District
acquisition of the property.
The water rights for the spring were defined in the agreement dated June 30, 1988 between
Robert Santos and East Bay Regional Park District. The Santos property is limited to 1400
gallons per 24 hour day period for domestic, household and garden purposes. There is no
allowance for additional water quantity. With the addition of a possible third residential
unit the prescribed water allotment maybe affected, thus requiring the installation of a
water meter to monitor and control the usage. The District requests as a condition of
approval that the property owner pay for a water meter to be installed by the District.
The septic field for any development on parcel "C" will not be on and should not impact
Park District lands. The septic field should be contained within parcel "C".
The Park District also requests as a condition of approval a 30' scenic easement to restrict
structures along the common boundary between parcel"C" and District land for the purpose
of a buffer.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this minor subdivision application. If you
have any questions please call me at 531-9300 extension 2312.
Very truly yours,
Linda I Pra
Acquisition Park Planner II
East Bay Regional Park District 11:00 Skyline Boulevard Oakland, CA 94619-2443
Administrative Offices 415-531-9300 FAX 415-331-3239
June 14 , 1991
Contra Costa Community Development 1*ar ment
651 Pine Street
Fourth Floor, North Wing
Martinez , CA 94553-0095
REIMS 19-91
Dear Candi Wensley:
The Alhambra Valley Improvement Association has discussed
this proposal on Brookwood Road. A heavy proportion
of the proposed property to be developed lies within
the creek itself . The property is very narrow with
the existing road taking up another heavy proportion.
There appears to be no place sufficiently far from
the creek for septic fields unless they are put on
East Bay Regional .Park property.
We recommend denial of this application. We are certain
that the Alhambra Valley Specific Plan would prohibit
development of this property. We strongly urge that
a field trip be made in this case. The creek environment
is seriously in jeopardy by this proposal. Full creek
setback should be honored .
Sincerely,
Hal Olson
President , Alhambra valley Improvement Association
Agenda Item # C
Community Development Contra Costa County
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13, 1992 - 7:30 P.M.
BOARD OF APPEALS
I. INTRODUCTION
SCHELL & MARTIN, INC. (Applicant) - BOB & KAREN SANTOS (Owners); County File
MS 19-91; This is an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision to subdivide 2.27
acres into 3 lots. Variances are requested for a 60-foot lot depth on Parcel B (120-feet
required). Subject property is located on Brookwood Drive, approximately 900 feet
south of the intersection of Reliez Valley Road and Brookwood Drive, in the Alhambra
Valley area. (R-20) (ZA J-12) (CT 3470.00) (Parcel #365-150-033)
II. RECOMMENDATION
Uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision, deny the appeal.
III. BACKGROUND
The background for this application is contained in the May 4, 1992 Staff Report to
the Zoning Administrator.
IV. DISCUSSION
This item was heard by the Zoning Administrator on May 4, 1992 in which the Zoning
Administrator denied the application. The Zoning Administrator's findings for denial
are contained in the attached Staff Report. Briefly, the subject property due to its
topography and physical features is unsuitable for subdivision. The findings for denial
are as follows:
A. The subdivision as proposed does not comply with the General Plan as reouired
by Government Code 66474.61(a) of the Subdivision Map Act.
The general plan designation for the subject property is Agricultural Lands
which requires a minimum parcel size of 5 acres for division of property. The
subject property is 2.23 acres in size.
B. The subject property is not physically suitable for the type of development -
667474.61(c).
A creek traverses the western portion of the subject property and a 20-foot
utility access easement along the eastern boundary. The creek structure
setback as required by Section 914.14 of the Ordinance Code would reduce the
buildable area of the parcels substantially not providing an adequate building
site if the existing homes were lost due to fire or creek instability.
V. CONCLUSION
Staff finds the proposed subdivision is not consistent with the General Plan and the
Subdivision Map Act. If the Planning Commission finds merit in this application, staff
recommends the Conditions of Approval attached to the May 4, 1992 Staff Report to
the Zoning Administrator.
DD/sj/aa
MS34/19-91.DD
10/1/92
Agenda Item # }�•
Community Development Department Contra Costa County
COUNTY ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
MONDAY, MAY 4, 1992 - 9:30 A.M.
I. INTRODUCTION
SCHELL & MARTIN, INC. (Applicant) - BOB & KAREN SANTOS (Owners), County File
#MS 19-91 : The applicant requests approval of a tentative map to divide 2.27 acres
into three lots. The applicant is requesting a variance for a 60 foot lot depth on Parcel
B (120 feet required). Subject property is located on Brookwood Drive, approximately
900 feet south of the intersection of Reliez Valley Road and Brookwood Drive, in the
Alhambra Valley area. (R-20) (ZA: J-12) (CT 3470.00) (Parcel #365-150-033)
This item was continued from March 23, 1991, April 6, 1992, April 20, 1992 to May
4, 1992 at the applicant's request.
II. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends this application be denied.
III. DISCUSSION/FINDINGS
The proposed subdivision consists of dividing 2.27 acres into three parcels. The parcel
is highly constrained to development due to the location of the creek and the access
road. Proposed Parcels A and B are entirely located within the creek structure setback
and would require a substantial exeception to Title 9 for any future construction.
The subject property is a split general plan designation. The portion outside the creek
structure setback is Single Family Residential-Low Density (SL) and the portion within
the structure setback is Agricultural Lands (AL). The allowable density range for SL
is 1.0 to 2.9 dwelling units per acre and for AL is 1 dwelling unit per 5 acres. If the
subdivision were to be reconfigured to two lots dividing the property at its widest
portion (Attachment A - Staff Study), the property would still not comply with the
General Plan. Proposed Parcel A would be required to be a minimum of 5-acres to
meet the General Plan criteria under the Staff Study proposed Parcel A would be
approximately two (2) acres. Proposed Parcel B would potentially comply with the
General Plan designation of SL, in which a 20,000 square foot lot is consistent with
the designation.
The draft Alhambra Valley Specific Plan identifies this parcel as Agricultural Lands.
2
Staff finds the following:
A. The subdivision as proposed does not comply with the General Plan as required
by Government Code 66474.61(a) of the Subdivision Map Act.
B. The subject property is not physically suitable for the type of development -
667474.61(c).
If the Zoning Administrator gives consideration to approving this application, the item
should be continued for 45 days to allow reprocessing of the initial study of
environmental significance and formulation of conditions of approval.
DD/aa
MSXVIII/19-91.CW
1/29/92
4/1/92
4/8/92
4/22/92
.o
L aw o A
\ � o n� ^ n ^ v� �t1 .•
\ V� ~+apt- _ L � n '�O 'a7n2. � �'' `••t• � �
V
�i raiy
" to�;.' .:�\ `L }, � a :•�\ ,� '�„1
rt
,� nye.• '+l-lle�fdlpp0�, ..•• 4
qh
t ( 7N
0 1iu .. rc fGrZ o 00-YZ "; N
Lo
to
��� > ��a r j �,{ W•Tri :� i
a �
ew
0S
xj—
'�� • '� t : •• �,fin,• �`T:i t, .�
lob
lot
A L;
1 l Q
t:
5*
�•'
64 .40
r•/'•1• `••�� • •INGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL(Units ner not
��• acral' MIXED USE AREAS
•�• •t •.Y ;E VERY LOW(0.2 to 0.9) Mt DOWNTOWN RODEO
:�LOW(1.0 to 2.9) M2 PLEASANT HILL REDEVEI.
\•` pQ t' ]MEDIUM(3.0 to 4.9) MJ PLEASANT HILL BART SV
•�HIGH(5.010 7.3) ®WALNUT CREEK CORE Al-
�( M5 WEST PITTSBURG MIXED
/• A LTIP FAMI Y RESIDENTIAL! nits r n 1„c-el•
• 1O LOW(7.4 to 11.9) M6 DOWNTOWN CLAYTON .
-� ,• tg MEDIUM(12.010 20.9) M7 WOOD RANCH MB M9 C
��('� / /// ` 0/ (((1111 I�HIGH(21.01a 29.9) OP N SPAG ND OTH R ';L
i .• 1/ ; I�VERY HIGH(30.010 44.9) PS PUBLIC/SEMI-PUBLIC
// ,'• .• •• ` t t VVERY HIGH SPECIAL(4S.0 to 99.0) Pq PARKS AND RECREATIOII
., ]CONGREGATE CARFJSENIOR HOUSING(WA) F0--S1 OPEN SPACE
1 Ig MOBILE HOME 11.0 to 12.0) FA-LI AGRICULTURAL LANDS
1 •/ •'�• ` .OMMER-IA AND IND ICTRIA AC AGRICULTURAL CORE
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL DR DELTA RECREATION ANG
;• ,•• �t !•I•'• /
0)COMMERCIAL WA WATER
7F]OFFICE
f
'
N. .' �• ` P]BUSINESS PARK WS WATERSHED.ft QiM OFF ISLAND BONUS AF
LIGHT INDUSTRY
i, -��.• C I •da•:rant •:ws<•.xn ixm•.n+.
�• HEAVYINDUSTRY
• \ �••~ •1•� • COMMERCIAL RECREATION c•.v+�'+u•wt.c:.ceni ox r.
` \\ - /' •• J MARINA COMMERCIAL
i It•1 ,AIRPORT COMMERCIAL