HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11191996 - D.18 i Contra
s Costa
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ofri!;an�►
County
FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON v1
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
rA covK'�
DATE: November 19, 1996
SUBJECT: Continued Public Hearing on Wendt Ranch General Plan Amendment (GP 96-
0012) , Rezoning (RZ 96-3037) , - Preliminary and Final Development Plan
(DP 96-3004) and the Final EIR for Shapell Industries of Northern
California (Applicant and Owner) for residential development in the
Blackhawk/Danville area.
SPECIFIC REQUEST (S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 . Accept the following recommendations from the County Planning
Commission:
A. Certify that the Final Environmental Impact Report is
adequate and complete, has been prepared in compliance
with State and County CEQA Guidelines, and that the Board
considered the contents of the report prior to making a
decision on this project;
B. Adopt General Plan Amendment GP96-0012) ;
C. Approve the Rezoning of the subject site from the Heavy
Agriculture (A-3) and the Exclusive Agriculture (A-40)
Zoning Districts to the Planned Unit District (P-I) ,
County File *RZ96-3037) as recommended by the County
Planning Commission;
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMIT E
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE (S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON November 19 , 1996 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x OTHER X
See attached Addendum
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN
AYES: Zy V & TT NOES: None ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
ABSENT: III ABSTAIN: T MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
Contact: Dennis Barry, CDD (335-1210) ATTESTED November 19 , 1996
cc: Community Development PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
County Counsel THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Public Works AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Shapell Industries
Town of Danville B � DEPUTY
Continued Public Hearing on Wendt Ranch GPA
November 19, 1996
Page 2
D. Approve Preliminary and Final Development Plan (County
File #DP 96-3004) subject to the conditions as
recommended by the County Planning Commission;
E. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program; and
F. Adopt the Findings as modified.
OR
2 . Accept the following recommendation from the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission:
Deny the General Plan Amendment request (GP 96-0012) , the
Rezoning request (RZ 96-3037) and the Preliminary and Final
Development Plan (DP 96-3004) .
FISCAL IMPACT
None
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
At the November 12, 1996 hearing, the Board requested staff to
provide a response to their questions relating to the issues of
affordale housing, water qualtiy and traffic. The issue of
affordable housing is addressed in this Board Order. The Public
Works Department will provide a response under separate cover
relating to the issues of water quality and traffic.
At the November 12, 1996 Board Meeting, the Board requested staff
to investigate the potential of requiring this project to provide
low and moderate income housing, similar to the requirements
established through the Dougherty Valley Affordable Housing
Program.
The Board of Supervisors adopted the Dougherty Valley Affordable
Housing Program on March 22, 1994, which required projects within
Doughety Valley to provide at a minimum 250 of the total number
units constructed as affordable to very low, low and moderate
income households . The County currently has not adopted an
affordable housing program that would be applicable on a county-
wide basis . However, through development agreements, such as
Wiedemann Ranch and Alamo Summit, developers have agreed to pay a
one-time in-lieu fee ($150, 000 and $30, 000 respectively) to
provided affordable housing throughout the County.
The Housing Element of the County General Plan provides goals,
policies and implementation measures that guide the County in
planning for housing. The following goals and implementation
measures are related to the Wendt Ranch Project .
Goals
6-A To make decent, safe and affordable housing available to all
Contra Costa County residents.
6-B To make available a wide range of housing types and
residential densities to meet the needs of all age groups and
household sizes within Contra Costa County's population.
6-E To make housing available throughout the County, in reasonable
proximity to employment centers, for all demographic and
1
Continued Public Hearing on Wendt Ranch GPA
November 19, 1996
Page 3
economic segments of the County's population.
Implementation Measures
6-a Apply the more extensive use of flexible techniques such as
Planned Unit Developments and mixed residential and commercial
developments to obtain a balance of housing types, tenures,
densities and price ranges.
6-av Encourage the provision of an appropriate mix of housing
densities and types in proximity to employment centers.
In response to Draft EIR Alternative 4, the Affordable Housing
Alternative, the applicant has modified their request to include
approximately 8. 4 acres in the northeast corner of the project for
Multiple-Family Residential Low Density residetnial uses . This
designation would allow for a range of 46 to 76 dwelling units .
Under this proposal, approximately 140 of the units at the low-end
and 230 of the units at the high-end of the Multiple Family
Residential Low Density range could be provided as affordable
units . The applicant and the Town of Danville believe that the
multiple family units by design will be affordable at a moderate
income level .
COK:aw
j:\aw\wendtr.bo
11/14/96
a
ADDENDUM TO D. 18
November 19, 1996 Agenda
On November 12, 1997, the Board of Supervisors continued to this date the hearing on
the Wendt Ranch General Plan Amendment (County File #GP 0012-96), Rezoning (County
File #RZ 3037-96), Preliminary and Final Development Plan (County File #DP 3004-96), and
the Final EIR for Shapell Industries of Northern California (Applicant and Owner) for
residential development in the Blackhawk/Danville area.
Dennis Barry, Community Development Department, and Mitch Avalon, Public Works
Department, presented the staff reports and recommendations.
Mitch Avalon noted that the Public Works Department had sent a memo with revised
conditions to the Board members after the agenda was posted. The Board discussed the
matter.
Supervisor Rogers recommended accepting the memo revising the conditions.
Supervisor DeSaulnier seconded the motion.
The vote was as follows:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Smith
NOES: Supervisor Bishop
ABSENT/ABSTAIN: None
The following persons presented testimony on the matter:
Tom Koch, Shapell Industries of Northern California, 2682 Bishop Dr.,#206, San
Ramon;
Howard Siu, appeallant, 1465 Lawrence Road, Danville;
Edward Pancoast, Save Our Danville Creeks, 443 Verona Avenue, Danville;
Joan Butt, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services, San Ramon Valley Unified
School District, 699 Old Orchard Road, Danville;
Mike Daley, 729 Everett Street, El Cerrito;
Jim Blickenstaff, 1430 Talavera, San Ramon;
Michael Conklin, 2551 Aranda Drive, San Ramon;
Laura McDaniel, 1253 Lawrence Drive, Danville;
Lettie Siu, 1465 Lawrence Road, Danville;
Linda Lemon, Save Our Danville Creeks, 522 Zenith Ridge, Danville;
Guy Bjerke, Home Builder's Association, P.O. Box 5160, San Ramon;
Stephanie McFarland, Shadow Creek HOA, 4111 Creekpoint Court, Danville;
1
Don Copland, Shapell Industries of Northern California, 2682 Bishop Dr., #206, San
Ramon;
Nancy Mulvihill, 4490 Fleetwood Road, Danville;
Ward Nyhus, 11661 San Vincente, #31, Los Angeles.
Tom Koch, Shapell Industries of Northern California, and serveral consultants spoke in
rebuttal.
All persons desiring to speak having been heard, the Board considered the issues
presented.
Supervisor DeSaulnier moved staffs recommendations 1 A, B, C, E and F, and further
moved recommendation D be continued for hearing on December 10, 1996, at 3:30 p.m.
Supervisor Torlakson seconded the motion.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that recommendations 1 A, B, C, E and F are
APPROVED; and that Rezoning Ordinance 96-43 is INTRODUCED, reading WAIVED, and
December 3, 1996 is set for ADOPTION of same;
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the hearing on the Preliminary and Final
Development Plan (County File #DP 3004-96), and the Vesting Tentative Map (County File
#SD 8002-96) is CONTINUED to December 10, 1996, at 3:30 p.m. in the Board's Chambers.
2
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DATE: November 15, 1996
TO: Member of the Board of Supervisors
FROM: J.Michael �Alfor�Dector,Public Works
SUBJECT: Wendt Ranch,Tassajara Valley;Subdivision 8002
FILE: SUB 8002
On November 12, 1996,the Board took testimony on the above project and continued the matter to November
19, 1996. The Board requested staff to address several issues that came up during the hearing. It should be noted
that all drainage and water quality impacts were identified and adequately addressed in the environmental review
process. Mitigation measures were included in the EIR for this project. After the close of the comment period
additional concerns were raised about the proposed conditions of approval that would implement the mitigation
measures identified in the EIR The following are the issues and staff's recommendations for each one:
1. Storm Water Quality
a. Storm Water Quality (BMP)Plan.Through the hearing process,several issues have been
raised regarding water quality and the use of Best Management Practices(BMPs)to mitigate
both construction and urbanization impacts to water quality as a result of this project.A BMP
is an activity or device intended to prevent or treat pollution and usually refers to the preferred
solution available, based on good engineering practice. Construction impacts are limited to
sedimentation,erosion,and materials handling during construction that may affect local water
bodies. These impacts and mitigation measures are addressed through the applicants
requirement to submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP). The SWPPP,which
addresses construction impacts only,must follow specific guidelines established by the State
Water Resources Control Board. The State Water Resources Control Board also requires
urbanization impacts,which include the post-construction impacts of the new subdivision,to
be addressed through the development of long-term BMPs for all aspects of the development.
This includes long-term monitoring to measure the effectiveness of the BMPs chosen to mitigate
the water quality impacts of the project. The conditions recommended for this subdivision
include BMPs which address all aspects of construction,urbanization and the related monitoring
necessary to measure effectiveness. Staff is recommending that the applicant be conditioned to
submit a comprehensive storm water quality plan for the reduction or elimination of pollutants
from the project's post-construction storm water. As part of this plan, the applicant shall
demonstrate how required long-term BMP's will be incorporated into the project and how these
measures will perform with respect to water quality improvement.The plan shall also provide
a monitoring program to insure the effectiveness of the implemented measures.
The applicant's site plan included a detention basin that mitigates the impacts to water quantity
by reducing the peak of a storm in the downstream drainage system. As part of the
recommended conditions of approval,staff is requiring the developer to incorporate a basin into
the project design that will mitigate both water quality and water quantity impacts. This entails
the incorporation of wetlands or biofrlter as part of the detention basin design.A biofilter is a
basin or drainage system that mitigates the impacts of water quality.There is a difference in the
time storm water is detained in a detention basin and the time storm water is detained in a water
quality basin Typical standards for detention basins require that the basin drain in 24 hours in
preparation for the next storm. Water quality basins require greater storage times of between
48 and 96 hours to effectively reduce or eliminate suspended solids like soil and vegetative
debris. This additional storage period,,therefore requires a larger basin design then that
originally proposed by the applicant.
A single measure has no protection against failure. The measure either works or doesn't and
when it doesn't there is no other protection against the impacts of urbanization. Additional
measures are therefore required to provide some redundancy in protection as well as reducing
the impacts to storm water quality. Staff has therefore required that additional BMP's be
incorporated into the project design above and beyond the biofilter to provide this level of
redundancy in the water quality plan.
Recommendation,Delete condition 159.C.regarding the review of BMP's and substitute the
following:
Y.'r.:r.::J:":iiiiiii:•iii iiY+:i::^:+i:•i'hi:iiiiY-iiii:isii:•:'-iiiiiiii:?4i:?^::::{???.Y:•:i'4:??Yiiii}iii:i:::i:•iF:•::•iii;:•i:??•r:::•iiY'v.^:•'i.•.^:•!i'-5ii:4ii•:::::•i::rr:ii:
159.0. <''::.::?:.:.<...'.::..:.. `?,....t:::. ?..::....:,...;....::a
c. a
.ii..i'.i'.y.:..;.::.i i:.:...�...:...�::::::::.::.:.:.:...:': .:: •:?iii ..:.i...:::... :....::. .:..
ih2 €oi?[>:: f>:: t v €P.t'::: t.....
?i;: ::;:;;'.:: ';:;2t::J:7i:>'.:Si:>:i)::;ii}..:::::..�::: ..::.::.:•.�.: :....
l c rks:'forreWOW."W d#iIb*e. ;'.::.:...:.:...:.: .::;`::nrd ussu
'. i... °utu t . i:.;:.;: ..:.;:':.;:.;::..;:.;::.....:..:...
irevte €€fid: ..., rova >...,�atolalzt'<#tipa>M.....; z:)i ::; ►'
b. Creek Bank/Levee Stability.The applicant has been conditioned to submit a drainage study
which will analyze existing,interim and ultimate conditions of existing and proposed drainage
systems as well as the feasibility of the applicant's drainage plan to mitigate drainage impacts.
As part of this study the applicant will be required to analyze slope stability,allowable creek
velocities and erosion control measures for watercourses within the project and downstream of
the project. Slope stability, creek velocity, erosion and increased flow within the creek
downstream may have a potential impact on the Siu Pond levee system which is adjacent to the
creek channel. Staff recommends that the drainage analysis be expanded to also address the
potential impacts to the Siu Pond levee system.
Recommendation-Modify condition of approval 4 152 as follows:
::: ....:............:...:...:.. : cant:shall reta:i:n:. .a.:::li.:censed
eotechnicalttaf152.A. M'` aP?li
engineer to perform.a
study which:'ate.slope irid Ie stability,allowable
geek velocity,and erosion pota for watercourses,within the project and
downstream of the projegt,where; :runoffand.runoff.volume has.increased
due to the project The stodyhall analyzeim. teelc banks d4tr+CPOO
f
.s .::::. ,::.i:.iiiii:::::i::: :.!Isis:::•,.:!!::.::iL.:<.:i::::A. :................. .,i.:::Y�.::: .:i':{} iii:: :
P
�e t#hrpug the W Pr Per y which etat7s �dx# �dit a�u pond
that borders thewesterly meek a And#ho Uft
acrossc>melte3urpend ,sasprcaaizlc , additcz stab� i
pf the poncrete:sptllway a dt . tabtitty of thc,pz �rar a :"ev d:
6orderxn�the•�recl,in:tlia vtcmtt3r fl£and l�edi��eiyflc�wtnstreacn of t
Away Thts�repcx�tshallrncTUdeax►ymeastr;�s �sietsessaiytotgate
#tzpests;4f:fh��p?cmle�t;on;the;�€�h�ltiy�f•#�e ekb#rtk�� The report should
also address levee stability, embankment protection, draw-down.effect and
li. uefaction concerns,related.to.the.detention basin site._ '(#
q
viewed..byubUc.'4itrrks, aid acwednd., av
tmralor (EIR Mitigation Measure I.5.a)
C. Maintenance and Monitoring Plan.The conditions of approval,as recommended,require the
applicant to submit a maintenance and monitoring plan for both the detention basin and related
drainage facilities as well as storm water quality facilities to be implemented as part of the
applicant's storm water quality plan.These requirements address monitoring the facilities after
they have been implemented.The conditions do not address the need for the applicant to begin
water quality monitoring immediately following project approval in order to establish a baseline
for water quality standards.The baseline will assist staff in determining the effectiveness of the
implemented water quality measures in the future.
Recommendations-Detention basin maintenance is covered by condition of approval 4154.
However,the following modifications are recommended:
154. applicant shall submit a plan for
maintenance of drainage facilities (creek channels,basin(s),etc.). The plan
shall include a secure and perpetual funding source and maintenance`entity for
regular basin maintenance to clear sediment,trash and other pollutants from
the basin as well as for remediation of bank erosion problems within creek
channels on-site. The plan shall outline who will maintain the drainage
facilities(creek channels,basin(s),etc.).:and how funding will be provided.' e
'pi ian shad ansa nciude a s edule... Ana.... mad ire ortrag is ensare she
aa►g cacss of t1 fac and Iii is rsibteox
irmanc and rst e most..... :: ..... rcr .am The
.:...................::..:.............:...1 ...:........:.:.................. .....:::....... .......... ..p ..1 ...::::.
basins) must comply with CCCFC&WCD standards for operation and
maintenance. CCCFC&WCD does not maintain basins which are less than
18,500 cubic meters H5 acre-feet in size.
iiru �(EIR Mitigation Measures I.2.g,I.S.b)
Storm water quality facility maintenance and monitoring is covered by condition of approval
#160.A. However,the following modifications are recommended:
160.A. i ' irtstrial .`.::".''a licant shall submit a maintenance and
.1. .g...::....:::::::: �. :PP ..:.:..
monitoring plan c1r year r�uaLy: al including reasonable performance
standards.This plan shall demonstrate a secure and perpetual funding source
and maintenance entity that shall be responsible for maintenance of the clean
water and/or rivate drains a facilities.Tom:;"azalso€iacucedt
::::;:..::. ......:: P.::.:::::::.;::.:.:::::.;::::::..::.::
p .tncotttorutg and zEporting tonsu :€bc �orsg�t <; ffecxres:o she
acilitres and tdent� the ent,t3t rspnsible for perforrnanc� cT overs� bt of
the mon►toritig'and reporttng pr�grary Applt�aEiitshall:sbrtierctai ':virater
ttattitnce< nd: nrt Ian: Qi<Pu1 :> 1Gr>T <::ac >:ltthe
�ti..... rSlrat fbr s ridi p 1:<
The following condition of approval should be added:
160.C. n apprQvat the Inectx applicant shad imdxaty begm art xnterrm
grater�ualit�teslm�progrant for both forks:afAtarna Cro�I�,p�sstn�shrou�h
�u�1� basellne� 'fhe .applicant:_sl�al� +�vot� �flt Pul��le "4Wo�s �d
4autfi�itY.�kv�i4e :�4�eve1�1�#$.�1�41� t�s�ig€�net>�41c�g�.
d. Storm Water Quantity Detention.The conditions of approval,as recommended,adequately
address the concern about storm water detention. The applicant is required to reduce post-
development peak flows to predicted pre-development flow levels at the downstream project
boundary. Project flows also can not result in a peak flow rate in Alamo Creek at the County
Line greater than the flow restriction of 4670 cfs. This limit was agreed upon by Alameda and
Contra Costa Counties. The applicant has included a detention basin facility in the project
design to mitigate their post-development flows.
Recommendation-Covered by conditions of approval#1504154.
e. Sluice Gate on Siu Pond.The first significant storm of the season carries with it most of the
urban pollutants that have accumulated over the dry months. The Siu Pond currently has a
manually operated sluice gate at the inlet to the pond. Closure of the gate at the time of this first
storm could help to prevent pollutants from entering the pond.With manual operation,there is
a chance that the gate may not be closed in time to prevent the storm flow from entering the
pond. An automated sluice gate could be utilized to close the gate at the appropriate time,
allowing the higher concentrated flow to pass by. The system would have a back up power
supply to insure proper operation.The gate would also be utilized in conjunction with the other
required BMP's as another level of protection in the water quality plan. The downside of this
kind of system is that it is mechanical and therefore requires maintenance and is susceptible to
breakdowns or failure.As an alternative to the automated sluice gate,the applicant may propose
a different means of protecting the pond intake.
The Town of Danville submitted a letter at the November 12, 1996 Board of Supervisors
hearing requesting that the condition of approval requiring the installation of the automated
sluice gate,which was deleted by the County Planning Commission,be reinstated.
Recommendation-The Board requested staff to work with the applicant and the surrounding
property owners in resolving this issue and staff or the applicant will be providing any changes
to the conditions of approval at the Board meeting on November 19, 1996.
f. Storm Water Quality Standards.Establishing explicit water quality standards(performance
standards)as a requirement of the water quality plan may result in a system that may never be
considered a success.For example,establishing criteria that storm water leaving the project site
be as clean or cleaner than pre-project conditions may not be attainable.Water quality fluctuates
as conditions within the surrounding environment change(weather,climate cycles,usage,etc.).
Even with the inclusion of long-term BNT's into the project design,storm water leaving the site
will have a certain level of pollutant contamination.To date,local municipalities have tried to
keep the Regional Water Quality Control Board from developing explicit water quality
standards in the hope that the work necessary would not be beyond the resource and expertise
of the local municipality. Requirements to improve water quality could be as simple as street
sweeping or as onerous as treatment of storm water much like our current sewer system.
Therefore,local governments have advocated measures that reduce storm water pollution to the
maximum extent practicable. This more "reasonable" standard interjects a common sense
approach into the decision making on individual measure(s)in an effort to reduce or eliminate
pollutants in storm water.
Recommendation - None. This issue is covered in condition of approval #160.A. which
requires the applicant to adopt reasonable performance standards.
2. Is Wendt circulation Qanning_compatible with the Tassajara Valley Property Owners Association
(TVPOA)Plan?
There was concern raised about the compatibility of the Wendt Project road layout with the TVPOA
plan, and if the Wendt Project will provide for"region wide"circulation needs. Staff reviewed the
circulation of the Wendt Project with respect to the TVPOA plan. There are two primary circulation
connections between the Wendt Project and the TVPOA plan. First and most important is an East/West
collector road parallel to Camino Tassajara. This road is included as part of the Wendt Project and is
stubbed out at the east and west property boundary for future extension. This road is compatible with
the overall TVPOA road circulation plan. The second connection was a network of residential streets
passing through the southeast comer of the Wendt property as part of a larger residential neighborhood
extending to the south and east of the Wendt project.The TVPOA plan calls for significant mass grading
of the ridge lines and hills at the southeast corner of the Wendt property and to the south and east of the
Wendt Ranch project.The Wendt Ranch project proposes to construct a cul-de-sac road along the ridge
east of the week This cul-de-sac could have been extended to provide for a connection to the south.To
do this,however,would have required massive grading with cuts up to 200-feet high and would have
decimated the top of the ridge at the south of the Wendt project. Because of the tremendous grading
involved staff is not recommending the cul-de-sac be extended to the south. With the East/West
collector road south of Camino Tassajara in place,the Wendt project should provide enough circulation
to be compatible with any future TVPOA plan. Any future TVPOA plan can be designed without a
connection to the south or southeast of the Wendt project.
Recommendation-None
3. Will the Wendt Ranch Proieect be paving-their fair share of any future TVPOA Traffic Impact Fee?
There will be several traffic impact mitigation measures identified with the TVPOA project. There was
a concern raised that the Wendt project should pay their fair share of these required improvements. The
EIR for the Wendt project analyzed the Cumulative Impacts of both the Wendt Ranch and TVPOA
projects as well as the Tassajara Meadows project and identified the Camino Tassajara/Crow Canyon
Road/Blackhawk Road intersection as having an unacceptable Level of Service(LOS)in the PM peak
hour upon build-out of all three projects. This intersection was also identified in preliminary TVPOA
documents as being a primary project impact.The Wendt Ranch project would contribute incrementally
to the unacceptable cumulative LOS at this intersection. Staff had considered this and is recommending
Condition of Approval 164, which requires the Wendt project to pay for their fair share of contribution
to the cost of improvements to the Camino Tassajara/Crow Canyon RoadBlackhawk Road intersection
if a fee is implemented The condition does not provide for other TVPOA mitigation measures that may
benefit the Wendt project and the cost of which should be shared by the Wendt project. Condition of
approval 164 should be revised to include any TVPOA mitigation measure that the Wendt project would
benefit from.
Recommendation -Revise Condition of Approval 164 as follows:
164. Prior to the issuance of Building Permits, applicant shall pay the appropriate fee,.if
adopted,for mitigation.of' as: xesul of development east of I�awrertcooa
ihe.'I`assalara galley area at the Crow Canyon RoadBlackhawk Road/Camino
Tassajara intersection
: ��oLalleyarea oz as�denttfted to��
;drict. nefirto tl3e ,endt Rrlch pro�eci(EIR Mitigation Measure CUM.D.2a)
4. Sewage overflow with pump station failure.
The Wendt Project includes a sewer pump station at the southerly end of the project near the creek.
There is a concern that if the sewer pump station fails through mechanical means such as a pump failure
or stops due to a power outage,then sewage would back-up and flow into the creek.The Sanitary District
has specific requirements for pump stations with respect to back up systems. These requirements must
be met before the District will issue a sewer permit for the project.
Recommendation-Add the following condition of approval:
166. App1`rrants�alstzbmtvercattontotheu6JtcWorkseparlmmrialtbat�baclrupsafet
measuresredrndant pump systems,altazattvopowerotrrr ,airs}oto} o p�ratec€
against o�cri�ow hav�heen pr�,vlded for the bump stattort to rdancry.nth��nira
Centra costa San;tar,��tstrtct��tlt;}rem�nts and standards
RMA.mw
a\enpvelmiteh\sd8002.tl l
x: M Avalon.Engineering Services
E.When,Engineering Services
M Morton,Flood Control
D. Barry,Deputy Community Development Di actor
Dr.Howard Siu
1465 Lawrence Road,Danville,CA 94506
Brian Welsh,Town of Danville
510 LaGooda Way,Danville,CA 94526
Thomas Koch
Shapell Industries of Northern California
P.O.Box 361169,Milpitas,CA 95035
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on Tuesdays November 19, 1996 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors DeSAULNIER, TORLAKS.ON and SMITH
NOES: NONE
ABSENT: SUPERVISOR BISHOP
ABSTAIN: SUPERVISOR ROGERS
RESOLUTION NO. 96/540
SUBJECT: In the Matter of the Wendt Ranch)
General Plan Amendment )
County File #GP 9'6-0012 )
The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES THAT:
There is filed with this Board and its Clerk a copy of Resolution No. 24-1996 adopted by
the Contra Costa County Planning Commission which discusses a General Plan
Amendment in the Blackhawk/Danville area (County File #GP fib-0012).
On Tuesday, November 12, 1996, the Board held a public hearing and continued the
matter to November 19, 1996 on said General Plan Amendment discussed by the Contra
Costa County Planning Commission, Resolution No. 24-1996. Notice of said hearing was
duly given in the matter required by law. The Board at the hearing, called for testimony
of all persons interested in this matter. -
The Board closed the public hearing and ADOPTS the General Plan Amendment as its
third General Plan Amendment for calendar year 1996 as allowed by State Planning Law.
The Board further finds, based on the entire record that the General Plan Amendment,
together with the other related approvals is consistent with the General Plan, including
compliance with traffic Level of Service standards for Basic Routes, consistency with
Action Plans for Routes of Regional significance, and compliance with performance
standards for public services as required in the General Plan's Growth Management
Element and is in harmony with the policies and goals of the remainder of the County's
General Plan.
JWC:aw
J:\aw\wendt.res
I hereby cw*that ate Ie a true aw eenset e y a!
a808 aa
taken and emered on Use minul� of the
wle"an Ne due
ATM,TE.. II `,F /99b
of
ow ��
Do"
Contact: Jim Cutler, CDD (510) 335-1236
cc: Community Development
Public Works Department
CAO
County Counsel
RESOLUTION 96/540
1W.
Wendt Ranch Ma A
General Plan Amendment - Staff Recommendation
•I n
.17
• .. .0001 LM TIA
two lw• .. '� . c:" � f n +r '•
To: Multiple Family
Residential -
.......... Single Familyc4ft—ft- Low Density
Residential
WmwL_Tr.. High Density
< f �.
Iff ca
r1-
f ♦. t -� .a .r � Fr. } .
r -&ow lir TrW
` 4
c-4,w,r
I
To: Open Space `!�{`\ \
ws...Mir tr f �`
.� lr / •�
r/
.r
UG
To: Single Family
Residential -
- High Density ,
T
0 800
t '
Feet
I hereby certify that this amendment to the I hereby certify that this amendment to the
Contra Costa County General Plan was ap- Contra Costa County General Plan was adopted
proved by the Contra Costa County Planning by the Board of Supervisors on
Commission on November 5, 1996. November 19, 1996.
Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervi-
sors and County Admin'strator
Ha ey E. gdon
Director of Community Development By: Deputy