Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12091997 - D12 D. 12 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on December 9, 1997, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Uilkema, Canciamilla and DeSaulnier NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Gerber ABSTAIN: None This is the time noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing the appeal of Judith Acton, 4035 Central Court, Martinez, from the decision of the Contra Costa County Public Works Department, Application and Permit Center, on the issuance of an encroachment permit for a curb cut, to Patrick John Hodges, 655 Central Avenue, Martinez. (See Attachment Exhibit A). Steven Kersevan, Senior Traffic Engineer, Public Works Department, gave the staff report and background on the matter. The public hearing was opened, and the following persons spoke: Patrick John Hodges, Permit Applicant, 655 Central Avenue, Martinez; -Charlie and Judith Acton, Appellants, 4035 Central Court, Martinez. All persons desiring to speak having been heard, the Board considered the issues. Supervisor Uilkema noted that her office has been working with the parties, and suggested that the matter be continued to December 16, 1998, at 2:30 p.m. Supervisor Rogers seconded the motion. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the above matter be CONTINUED to December 16, 1998, at 2:30 p.m. in the Board's chambers. I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED Decor 9, 1997 Phil Batchelor, lerk of the Board I Superviso s ounty ministrator BY LM Barbara S. ra eputy Clerk CAO County Counsel Public Works Dept., Traffic Engineering • «J Attactment Exhibit A D. 12 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: December 9, 1997 SUBJECT: Public Hearing on Administrative Appeal by Judith Acton of an Issuance of an Encroachment Permit to Patrick John Hodges. SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. Recommended Action: ADOPT Option I from following Board options: Option I -Allow the encroachment permit issued to Patrick John Hodges to stand, thus allowing an additional driveway to serve his property. Option II - Revoke the encroachment permit, thus not allowing a second driveway. 11. Financial Impact: . None. Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATOR L- 1w., _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED_OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SK::eh g:\transenglbobr97tr1encroach.wpd Orig.Div: Public Works(TE) Contact: Steve Kersevan-Tel.313-2254 c: M.Shiu,Deputy Public Works Director J.Bueren,Assistant Public Works Director,TE H.Ballenger,Assistant Public Works Director,ES Public Hearing on Administrative Appeal by Judith Acton of an Issuance of an Encroachment Permit to Patrick John Hodges. December 9, 1997 Page 2 III. Reasons for Recommendations and Background: The Public Works Department Application and Permit Center issued an encroachment permit on October 20, 1997 to Patrick John Hodges, for the installation of a second driveway. The Traffic Operations Division had received complaints regarding access onto Mr. Hodges property by his placement of boards adjacent to the curb for the purpose of parking a boat and trailer in his side yard. Prior to issuing the encroachment permit the site was reviewed by Steve Kersevan, County Traffic Engineer. The two main issues seemed to be the loss of one street parking place on Central Court and the existence of parking area adjacent to Mr. Hodges' driveway on Central Avenue. Every home on Central Court has a two-car garage as well as ample driveway area to park cars. The loss of one on street parking space does not seem to be excessive. The area adjacent to Mr. Hodges' driveway is used to access a side yard where two vehicles are parked. Placing a boat trailer in this location would hinder this access. Given this assessment it was felt a second driveway access was justified. IV. Consequences of Negative Action: Failure to allow a second access would just cause the problem of illegal encroachment in the gutter to access the side yard to continue.