Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01171995 - D.1 Con rr i TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS n. - = Costa d" County FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON ;? DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT oo ti`4° DATE: December 20, 1994 SUBJECT: APPEAL BY THE APPLICANT, ARTHUR L. ANDERSON (APPLICANT) OF THE SAN RAMON VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION DECISION TO DENY A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR AN OIL CHANGE FACILITY, COUNTY FILE #3001-93, IN THE ALAMO AREA. SPECIFIC REQUEST (S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS Option A 1. Uphold the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission and deny the appeal of the applicant. 2 . Adopt the Commission's findings for denying the project as the Board's own. Option . B 1. Find the Environmental Documentation prepared for this project as adequate. 2 . Adopt the mitigation monitoring program ,prepared for this project. 3 . Accept the appeal of the applicant and approve the project. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The background information is contained in the staff report attached to the Board Order. This item was originally referred to the San Ramon Valley. Regional Planning Commission by the Zoning Administrator, due to the anticipated controversy over the proposal. The item was presented to the Commission with a recommendation for approval. . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATU RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMEN TION OF OARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON _,, January 17, 1995 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER x See addendum for Board action. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: 9 ,4 , 5 NOES: 3 ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: - ABSTAIN: 1 MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact:Debbie Chamberlain 646-2031 ATTESTED J,qnua*-3i 17, 1AAS cc: Community Development . Department PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Arthur Anderson THE BOAR OF SUPERVISORS Public Works COUN ADMINISTRATOR BY J DEPUTY DC/df Page Two The Commission, on September 21, 1994 after four public hearings, with two continuances by the applicant to allow staff time to evaluate additional traffic information requested by the Commission, denied the applicant's request. Testimony on the project focused on concerns over the intensity of the use on the site and the potential for conflicting traffic patterns and that additional u-turns, made necessary by the project would be hazardous on Stone Valley Road. The Commission, after reviewing all the testimony and evidence before them, denied the applicant's request for the reasons contained in the attached resolution. If the Board of Supervisors finds merit in approving the project, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors over-turn the decision of the Planning Commission, accept the appeal by the applicant and approve the project subject to the attached conditions of approval. ADDENDUM TO ITEM D. 1 JANUARY 17, 1995 On December 20, 1994, the Board of Supervisors closed the hearing on the appeal of Arthur L. Anderson (appellant) from the decision for denial of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission on the request (County File #3001-93) by Arthur Anderson (applicant and owner) for approval of a combination development plan/land use permit to establish an automotive lube facility in the alamo area and deferred the decision on said matter to this date. Chair Bishop announced that although the public hearing had been closed at the December 20, 1994 , meeting, the applicant/appellant had agreed to waive that and permit public comment . Sanford Skaggs, P.O. Box V, Walnut Creek, representing the applicant, expressed that if the Board wished to hear testimony, they were willing to waive any technical or other objections related to notice or otherwise, and he requested that the testimony be limited to new matter. Chair Bishop moved. to re-open the hearing. The vote on the motion was unanimous . Mitch Avalon, Public Works Department, commented on a memo dated January 12, 1995 that had been faxed to the Board members on Friday and he made copies available . Mr. Avalon commented on the issues of the trail, turning conflicts and pollutants in the creek. The following persons presented testimony: Michael Gibson, 70 Sara Lane, Alamo, in opposition; Preston Taylor, 35 Alta Sierra Place, Alamo, representing Stone Valley Road Preservation Association, in opposition; Carol Galvin, 1481 Arbor Lane, Alamo, representing the Association for the Preservation of Danville Boulevard, in opposition; Don Copeland, 2350 Heritage Oaks Drive, representing the Alamo Improvement Association, in opposition; Nancy D. Kaplan, 184 Canyon Vista Drive, Danville, representing the Alamo Parks and Recreation Advisory Committee, requesting trail easements and for herself in opposition; Sanford Skaggs, P.O. Box V, Walnut Creek, representing the applicant, commented on the history of the property, the trail easement request, traffic issues,: the turning radius, the need for this facility, the stacking issue, the height of the proposed building, and he requested approval of this application. Arthur Anderson, applicant, ' responded to Board questions on issues including uses considered for this parcel . The Board discussed the matter. Supervisor Bishop moved to approve the recommended Option A to uphold the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission and deny the appeal of the applicant based upon and adopt the Commission' s findings for denying the project as this Board' s . The motion died for lack of .a second. Supervisor DeSaulnier moved to approve the recommended Option B, and he expressed concern with the lag time for the installation of the two left hand turns and he requested that staff investigate the possibility of accelerating that . Supervisor Torlakson seconded the motion. Supervisor Smith commented that the issues have been addressed, advised of legal constraints the Board is under and indicated his support of the motion. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing is CLOSED, and Option B is APPROVED as recommended, _ and staff is REQUESTED to investigate the possibility of accelerating the traffic improvements for the two left hand turns .