HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12021997 - D14 •.' '�_ Contra
's Costa
TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS County
FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP
jos,.
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT rAco -,
DATE: November 11, 1997
SUBJECT: December 2 , 1997 Public Hearing on the Nomination of the San Ramon
Valley Regional Planning Commission and the Zoning Administrator of
Existing Mature Trees within the Stonecastle Estates Subdivision,
Subdivision 7154, in the Alamo area for Heritage Designation (County
File #HT 1-97)
SPECIFIC REQUEST (S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATIONS
Designate the eight oak trees and one cedar tree nominated by the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission and the Zoning
Administrator for heritage status pursuant to the Heritage Tree
Preservation Ordinance.
FISCAL IMPACT
None .
BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
The background for this application originates with the review of
a tentative map application by the San Ramon Valley Regional
Planning Commission in 1988-89 .
1988-89 Tentative Map Application and Planning Commission Approval
In 1988, the County received an application to subdivide 18 acres
located on the east side of Danville Boulevard near the
intersection of Hillgrade Road in the Alamo area into one-half acre
lots . The site contains a number of mostly natural features
including: rock outcroppings, a section of San Ramon Creek, a
modest waterfall, and a number of mature trees of various species .
After conducting a number of public hearings on the project, the
San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission approved the
subdivision subject to a number of conditions which included:
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE je.�' A &qn
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMI�T7' E
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE (S) :
ACTION OF BOARD ON December 2, 1997 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X
See the attached Addendtun for Board action.
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A
x_ 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.
Contact : Bob Drake [ (510) 335-12141
Orig: Community Development Department ATTESTED December 2, 1997
CC , Suncrest Homes, Inc . PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF
David Evans Associates THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Alamo Improvement Association
Alamo Parks & Recreation Com. (CSA R7-A) AND TTJNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Public Works Dept .
DEPUTY
j : \groups\cdadpool\bob\ht970001
RD\ C (
Nomination of Trees for. Heritage Designation
Stonecastle Estates Subdivision, Alamo area
• provision of a park site deeded to the County near the front
of the site;
• provision of a public trail facility approximately parallel to
the creek;
• review of the residential designs for those lots which would
be placed closest to Danville Boulevard;
• protection of existing rock outcroppings;
• consideration of existing mature trees on the property for
heritage designation pursuant to the Heritage Tree
Preservation Ordinance (it should be noted that at the time of
the 1989 decision on the subdivision, the County had not yet
adopted the other tree ordinance, the Tree Protection and
Preservation Ordinance) ; and
• review in a public hearing format for implementation of many
of the restrictions imposed by the Commission.
1997 Developer Application for Heritage Status
Following the tentative map approval, the original developer fell
into bankruptcy and the property was ultimately sold earlier this
year to Suncrest Homes . Pursuant to the original conditions of
approval, the developer submitted documentation on the design of
the project which was listed on the agenda of the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission, but heard by the Zoning
Administrator.
One of the items considered by both the Zoning Administrator and
the Planning Commission was an application by the developer to
designate existing trees on the property for heritage status . The
heritage status requires a discretionary review by the Building
Inspection Department prior to any alteration near the root zone of
a designated tree, and a discretionary review by the Zoning
Administrator in the event that, a designated tree is proposed for
removal .
The original application had proposed that 28 mature trees on the
site be designated for heritage status . All of the trees which
were proposed for heritage status had trunks with a minimum
circumference of 72-inches (approximately 23-inches in diameter) .
The trees proposed for heritage status included species which are
indigenous to the area (e .g. , oak) as well as several trees which
are exogenous to the area.
Zoning Administrator and Planning Commission Review of Application
Contrary to the initial application, the staff review on the
heritage tree application had recommended against the designation
of certain trees for heritage status as follows :
• Tree #10 - A 48-inch oak tree adjacent to the southern
boundary of the subdivision, on the west bank
of the creek. While protection of this tree
might be desirable under ideal conditions, it
would be contrary to the approved plans of the
County Flood Control District for reducing
peak-flow impacts along the creek which are
scheduled to commence next year.
• Tree #17 - A 27-inch oak tree along the east creek bank.
At the time, it appeared that protection of
-2-
1
County File #HT 1-97
Suncrest Homes (A & O)
the tree might also conflict with the planned
flood control improvements .'
Eucalyptus & Walnut Trees - The site contains a total of 18
trees of these species which
are exogenous to the Bay Area.
Staff felt that County
protection of these species is
not warranted.
After excluding the above trees, there were a total of eight oak
trees and one cedar tree which staff recommended for heritage
status .
A public hearing on the application and staff recommendation was
conducted on August 6 and September 25, 1997 . After taking
testimony, the Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator both
acted to nominate the more limited selection of trees recommended
by staff .
Acceptance of Final Map and Subdivision Improvements
Recently, the County processed a final map for the approved
subdivision. Prior to approval of the final map, the applicant
provided improvement plans that included measures recommended by an
arborist to minimize damage to the trees nominated for heritage
status by the Zoning Administrator and the San Ramon Valley
Regional Planning Commission.
CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION BY THE BOARD
The denial of this application by the Board will prevent any trees
from being designated for heritage tree status, and thus qualify be
subject to County protection under the heritage tree ordinance.
Such action would not invalidate the Stonecastle Estates
subdivision nor prevent the developer from qualifying for building
permits . Moreover, there is a development agreement with the
developer on this property which was entered into in 1995 and which
would prevent the application of new tree protection restrictions
until the subdivision is completed.
'The applicant has recently indicated that this tree can be
protected without jeopardizing the flood control improvements
planned for this section of creek.
-3-
ADDENDUM TO ITEM D. 14
December 2, 1997 Agenda
This is the time noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for the
hearing on the recommendation of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning
Commission on the request by the Suncrest Homes (Applicant and Owner), for
approval to nominate 28 mature trees of various species with a trunk
circumference of 72 inches or greater, as heritage trees, pursuant to the Heritage
Tree Preservation District Ordinance (Chapter 816-4), in the Stonecastle
subdivision. (County File #HT 1-97).
Dennis Barry, Interim Community Development Director, gave the staff
report. Mr. Barry noted that the Community Development Department staff had
recommended against designating trees #10 and #17 as heritage trees because of
their location to the creek bank.
Robert Drake, Community Development Department, advised the Board
that the tree specified in the staff report as #17 should be tree #23.
The hearing was opened, and Gordon Gravelle, applicant, commented on
the nomination of the trees.
All those desiring to speak having been heard, the hearing was closed, and
the Board discussed the issues.
Supervisor Gerber moved to designate the nine trees as noted in the staffs
recommendations, and suggested adding the heritage designation to trees #10
and #23, pending the flood control project decision.
Victor Westman, County Counsel, advised that it may be better to
designate the trees initially, subject to the trees being moved or modified if
necessary for the proposed flood control project.
Supervisor Gerber stated that her motion included Mr. Westman's advice.
Supervisor Rogers seconded the motion.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that staff s recommendations are
APPROVED; and the Community Development Department staff is DIRECTED
to also designate Heritage Tree status, pursuant to the Heritage Tree
Preservation Ordinance, to trees #10 and #23, subject to modification for the
proposed flood control project.
1