The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 02131996 - C57 C. 57 and C. 58 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 13, 1996 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, Torlakson and Smith NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor DeSaulnier ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Correspondence C.57 LETTER dated December 15, 1995, from Sanford Skaggs, Esq., McCutchen, Doyle, et al, 1331 North California Blvd., Walnut Creek, CA 94596, representing Franklin Canyon Enterprise, owner of Franklin Canyon Golf Course and surrounding property in the City of Hercules, requesting clarification of the terms of an agreement to allow the City to process a parcel map dividing the property into not more than three parcels. ***REFERRED TO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, AND COUNTY COUNSEL FOR RECOMMENDATION. C.58 LETTER dated February 1, 1996, from Lisa Adamson, Secretary, West County Agency, 2910 Hilltop Drive. Richmond, CA 94806, transmitting Conflict of Interest Code for the West County Agency of Contra Costa County. 'REFERRED*REFERRED TO COUNTY COUNSEL IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendations as noted f***) are approved. hereby certify that this Is a true and coneotcopyof an action taken and ontered on the minutes of the Board'of Super v' o on the date shown. ATTESTED: /99/r.._ PHIL BATCHELOR,eferk of the Board Of Supervisors and County Administrator c.c. Correspondents 1111W lt: ,Deputy Community Development Director County Counsel 57 McCUTCHEN. DOYLEY BROWN & ENERSEN CAN PIIANCIScc COUNSCLORS AT LAW WA$MINGTON.O.G. WS ANGELES 1331 NORTM CALIrQRNtA 6OOLEVARD TAIPEI V0 JOSE POST ORrICE BOX V WALNUT CRCSK WAt.HU'(CREEK,CALIFORNIA 94CDG AFPILIATE'D OFMCCG MENLO PARK rC"PNONE(510)937-0000 MAN¢KOK rAGSIMI.B 1610)975-63sp 461.11194 De=ber 15, 1995 SHANGHAI DIRCCT DIAL NUMOCR (510)Drs-8310 INTERNET HAND DE11WRY e9ss�lmdbe.eom Hon.t^Lyle Bishop,Chair,and Members of the Board of Supervisors c/o Mr.Phil Batchelor,County Administrator Contra Costa County 651 Fine St., X Ith Floor Martinez, CA 94553 Franklin Canyon Golf Course Out Nic 72334-001 Dear Supervisors. We represent Franklin Canyon Enterprise,the owner of the Franklin Canyon Golf Course and surrounding property in the City of Hercules, This is a regnemt for clarification of the terms of an agreement in order to allow the City to process a parcel visp dividing the property into not more than three parcels. Lr 1990,my client(represented by other counsel), the City and the Comity were involved in litigation centering on the proposed a=eration of the property and the required ag Ent regarding transfer of property taxesL Settlement of the case was negotiated and docuraented by a Settlement.Areemeat and Release dated February 27, 1990. Among,other things the Agrew=9 provides for the formation of a Spec Me Plan Sting Committee to assist the City in the preparation of a specific plan for 1he property. Under the te=of the Amt,the City is not to permit residential development of the property wdil the specific play is completed nor before improvements are made w Highway 4 if such omtruedon would impact the highway. Additionally,the agreement provides that the plats is"a prereosite to any discmdonary approvals for the Franklin Canyon Golf Course Property." (Section 5.F.) It is this low provision which requires clarification. The property now is a simple parcel. Prior,to annexation, Frm*hn Canyon had applied to the County for a parcel reap to divide die property into three parcels. As far as I know, this application was not corroversW and it was not an issue in the Litigation or,the settlement; however,it was not approved and recorded before annexation. Under the Map Act,after annexation the City assumes controi of all applicMions. -Frauldin Canyon confinues to desire to J �•�� Hon. Gayle Bishop, Chair, and Members of the Board of Supervisors December 15, 1995 Page 2 divide the parcel into not more than three parcels to facilitate financing and potentially to facilitate a future sale of some or all of The property. The City is reluctant to process the map because,among other reasons,it is concerned that it arguably is prohibited prior to the adoption of a specific plan,under the team of the agreemen# as a discretionary approval for the Golf Course property. We believe that provision was intended to oompliment the prohibition of residential development prior to the adoption of a specific plan. Although technically approval of a parcel map(a subdivision of 5 or less lots)is a discretionary act,we do not believe the parties intended that the specific plan be a prerequisite to the filing of a parcel map. First,the approval of the map would not be an approval "for the . . . Golf Course Property." Second,the conoeems expressed at the tune were about residential development of the hills and increased trat'iic on Highway 4 prior to its improvement and the map would.not create those impacts. A parcel map would not permit any development of the site that is prohibited by the agreement prior to adoption of a specific plan.t A subdivision map (other than a vesting map which we erre not requesting)does not permit development; it only allows for the sale,lease or financing of the resulting parcels separate from the whole. In order to make elear that the agreement does not prohibit the City from approving a parcel map,we request the Board to adopt the following order: AUTHORIZE the County Adminfistrator to do all things necessary or desirable,including the execution of documents, to clarify that the Settlement Agreement and Release among the County,the City of Hercules and Franklin Canyon Enterprise does not prohibit the City from approving a parcel map dividing the property that is the snb)ect of the agreement into not more than three parcels. We will then take the order to the City and determmne whether it requires anything more in order to accept the application for The parcel map. The final decision to approve or decry the map wi11 be made by the City as the property has been anmed. 1 The existing zoning would continue to allow one single family residence per parcel thus increasing the theoretical number from one to two or three depending on the number of parcels created by the parcel map. There is not intent to construct such residences as the owner wishes to pursue the specific plan and thereafter a major development of the property, c 57 Hoa;.Gayle Bishop,Chair,and Members of the Board of Supervisors December 15, 1995 Page 3 We ask that this request be Placed on the Board's agenda for consideration and action before year-end. If you have questions or need additional information or if there is anything further which we need to do to fhcilitate this request,please let me know. Very truly yours, A77 Sanford M. Skaggs i CC., W.Dennis Barry Victor 1. Westman,Esq, Mr.Vincent Tai Mr. Steve Hixson