Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10222002 - D2 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS `': . Contra FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP n, Costa unty COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ,. .. � DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2002 SUBJECT* DALE BRIDGES (APPLICANT & APPELLANT). THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE SAN RAMON VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO DENY THE REQUESTED MODIFICATION TO CONDITION OF APPROVAL#10 OF LP952061 TO ALLOW THE OUTDOOR SALE OF CHRISTMAS TREES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ADDRESSED 3212 DANVILE BOULEVARD IN ALAMO (LP012131) (DISTRICT III). SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. DENY the appeal and UPHOLD the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision to deny modification of Condition of Approval #10 of LP952061 to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees. 2. ADOPT the findings contained in Resolution #31-2002 as the basis for the Board's action. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE' RECOMMEMATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): -- ACTION OF BOARD ON October 22. 2002 -_-- APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER See attached adder dun VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY WHAT THIS IS A TRUE AND UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT: ABSTAIN: -_ -__, SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN Contact: Ruben Hernandez (3351838) ATTESTED OcLQI= 22, Z002 cc: Dale Bridges John Buten, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Peter Ostresky SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY DEPUTY tiw i Date October 22, 2002 Board of Supervisors File#LP012131 Page 2 BACKGROUND On November 1, 2001, Dale Bridges submitted an application to the Community Development Department requesting a modification to condition #10 of Land Use hermit #LP952061.The modification would allow the sale of Christmas trees on the site located at 3212 Danville Boulevard In the Alamo area. The County Zoning Administrator heard the application on August 12,2002.After reviewing the application and hearing testimony from the public,the Zoning Administrator denied the request.The Zoning Administrator found that there was insufficient evidence to support two of the required land use permit findings. Finding#1 requires that the proposed conditional land use not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the county.The Zoning Administrator determined that the lot would be inadequate to support the increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic that would be present on the site during tree sales and this would present a dander to the public. Finding#5 requires that the proposed land use permit not create a nuisance or enforcement problem. The site has been a constant source of complaints and code enforcement problems. In November and December of 2001, the applicant proceeded to distribute Christmas trees from the site without proper permits (see Exhibit B), The Zoning Administrator determined that compliance with the 20 conditions of approval recommended by the Alamo Improvement Association would be difficult and time consuming to enforce. On September 18, 2002 the Ban Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission beard an appeal of the August 12, 2002, Zoning Administrator's decision. The Commission upheld the denial based on the Zoning Administrator's findings. PROPOSED PROJECT The applicant is proposing to sell Christmas trees from the premises during the holiday season. During that time, the car dealership would be closed and the automobiles stored off-site. Customers would have the option to load their tree on site, or have the tree delivered to their homes. The proposed tree lot would operate from approximately one week before Thanksgiving, and would conclude by the 24#h of December. Following cleanup, the applicant would resume the sale of used vehicles, on or about December 30`h. The applicant is proposing to install a temporary 6-foot chain link fence enclosure around the northern half of the property for storage of the trees. Seven parking spaces would be set-aside for customer and employee parking. Access to the tree sales and parking area would be from Danville Boulevard through an existing driveway located on the southern Date October 22, 2002 Board of supervisors Pile#LP012131 Page 3 portion of the property. The sale of trees would take place in a 92' x 64' area on the northern half of the property. The area where the trees would be sold and stored would be fenced for security reasons. In the center of the tree sales area, the applicant is proposing to place a 12-foot high fiberglass Santa. Existing parking spaces in the southern half of the site normally reserved for the display of vehicles would be utilized to provide parking for employees and customers. Five additional parking spaces and valet parking would be provided within the public right-of-way on Danville Boulevard. The applicant has indicated that delivery of trees to the site would occur in mid-November. APPEAL Appeal Point: The appeal letter received from the Law Offices of Brian D. Thiessen addresses the fact that a minority of the Commissioners understood that Mr. Bridges has operated his auto lot with no complaints and that Mr. Bridges was asking for a permit that would allow him to operate for one year (Exhibit A). Appeal Response: Having the support of a minority of the Commissioners is not sufficient to approve the application, regardless of how they came to their decision. Contrary to Mr. Bridges' statement, multiple complaints have been received regarding alleged parking violations and violations of Mr. Bridges' Conditions of Approval for the used car lot. The appeal letter states that Mr. Bridges is requesting that he be granted a one-year trial run of the tree sales to prove that he can comply with the 20 conditions of approval recommended by the Alamo Improvement Association.A land use permit runs with the land and does not expire automatically even when a condition to the permit provides for such expiration or the local code provides for an automatic expiration. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the Board uphold the San Ramon Malley Regional Planning Commission's decision to deny the land use permit request to sell Christmas trees at the site located at 3212 Danville Boulevard in the Alamo area. ADDENDUM TO ITEM D.Z October 22, 2002 The Clerk of the Board heretofore noticed the hearing before the Board of Supervisors to consider the appeal of Dale Bridges(Applicant) and Peter Ostrosky(Owner) of the recommendation by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision to uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision to deny the request to allow a modification to Condition of approval allowing the outdoor sale of Christmas trees, a variance to the off-street parking design and layout requirements and approval of temporary signs/displays at 3212 Danville Boulevard in Alamo(LPO 12131) Catherine Kutsuris, Community Development Department, presented the staff recommendations and described the project. The public hearing was opened. The following persons spoke: Dale Bridges, 3212 Danville Blvd., Alamo, appellant/applicant; Dan Smith, 3210 Danville Blvd., Alamo, in opposition to the appeal; Beth Batchelor, 3412 Sandstone Road, Alamo, in support of the appeal; Brad Dorton, 1191 Douglas Court; Concord, in support of the appeal. Mr. Bridges spore in rebuttal. The Board discussed the matter and took the following action: CONTINUED the above hearing to November 5, 2002, at 2:00 p.m.; DIRECTED staff to return with a report on the status of fees owed by Dale Bridges and the average square footage of Christmas tree lots in the County. ;l �� �� �� �:€�� �. TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra PROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICPCosta COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR County DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2002 SUBJECT: DALE BRIDGES (APPLICANT & APPELLANT). THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE SAN RAMON VALLEY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION TO UPHOLD THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION TO DENY THE REQUESTED MODIFICATION TO CONDITION OF APPROVAL#10 OF LP952061 TO ALLOW THE OUTDOOR SALE OF CHRISTMAS TREES. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS ADDRESSED 3212 DANVILE BOULEVARD IN ALAMO (LP012131) (DISTRICT 111). SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. DENY the appeal and UPHOLD the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision to deny modification of Condition of Approval #10 of LP952061 to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees. 2. ADOPT the findings contained in Resolution#31-2002 as the basis for the Board's action. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATUREL- RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTEOF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND UNANIMOUS(ABSENT CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES; ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT:------__-ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN Contact: Ruben Hernandez (335-1339) ATTESTED cc: Dale Bridges PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Peter Ostrosky SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR BY —DEPUTY Date October 22, 2002 Board of Supervisors Fife#LP012131 Page 2 BACKGROUND On November 1, 2001, Dale Bridges submitted an application to the Community Development Department requesting a modification to condition #10 of Land Use Permit #LP952061.The modification would allow the sale of Christmas trees on the site located at 3212 Danville Boulevard In the Alamo area. The County Zoning Administrator heard the application on August 12, 2002.After reviewing the application and hearing testimony from the public, the Zoning Administrator denied the request.The Zoning Administrator found that there was insufficient evidence to supporttwo of the required land use permit findings. Finding#1 requires that the proposed conditional land use not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the county.The Zoning Administrator determined that the lot would be inadequate to support the increased pedestrian and vehicular traffic that would be present on the site during tree sales and this would present a danger to the public. Finding#5 requires that the proposed land use permit not create a nuisance or enforcement problem. The site has been a constant source of complaints and code enforcement problems. In November and December of 2001, the applicant proceeded to distribute Christmas trees from the site without proper permits (see Exhibit B). The Zoning Administrator determined that compliance with the 20 conditions of approval recommended by the Alamo Improvement Association would be difficult and time consuming to enforce. On September 18, 2002 the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission heard an appeal of the August 12, 2002, Zoning Administrator's decision. The Commission upheld the denial based on the Zoning Administrator's findings. PROPOSED PROJECT The applicant is proposing to sell Christmas trees from the premises during the holiday season. During that time, the car dealership would be closed and the automobiles stored off-site. Customers would have the option to load their tree on site, or have the tree delivered to their homes. The proposed tree lot would operate from approximately one week before Thanksgiving, and would conclude by the 24"' of December. Following cleanup, the applicant would resume the sale of used vehicles, on or about December 30th. The applicant is proposing to install a temporary 8-foot chain link fence enclosure around the northern half of the property for storage of the trees. Seven parking spaces would be set-aside for customer and employee parking. Access to the tree sales and parking area would be from Danville Boulevard through an existing driveway located on the southern _­­....................................................... ... ........................................................................................................................................ ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ....... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........ ......... ......... ......... ......... .. ....... ... ......_...... .............................. . ............. Date October 22,2002 Board of Supervisors mile#LPO12131 ,3age 3 portion of the property. The sale of trees would take place in a 92' x 64' area on the northern half of the property. The area where the trees would be sold and stored would be fenced for security reasons. In the center of the tree sales area, the applicant is proposing to place a 12-foot high fiberglass Santa. Existing parking.spaces in the southern half of the site normally reserved for the display of vehicles would be utilized to provide parking for employees and customers. Five additional parking spaces and valet parking would be provided within the public right-of-way on Danville Boulevard. The applicant has indicated that delivery of trees to the site would occur in mid-November. APPEAL Ar eal Point: The appeal letter received from the Law Offices of Brian D. Thiessen addresses the fact that a minority of the Commissioners understood that Mr. 'Bridges has operated his auto lot with no complaints and that Mr. Bridges was asking for a permit that would allow him to operate for one year (Exhibit A). Appeal Response: Having the support of a minority of the Commissioners is not sufficient to approve the application, regardless of how they came to their decision. Contrary to Mr. Bridges' statement, multiple complaints have been received regarding alleged parking violations and violations of Mr. Bridges' Conditions of Approval for the used car lot. The appeal letter states that Mr. Bridges is requesting that he be granted a one-year trial run of the tree sales to prove that he can comply with the 20 conditions of approval recommended by the Alamo Improvement Association.A land use permit runs with the land and does not expire automatically even when a condition to the permit provides for such expiration or the local code provides for an automatic expiration. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the Board uphold the San Damon 'Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision to deny the land use permit request to sell Christmas trees at the site located at 3212 Danville Boulevard in the Alamo area. RESOLUT ION RESOLUTION NO. 31-2002 BEFORE THE BOARD OF APPEAL CONTRA COSTA COUNTY STATE OF CALIFORNIA APPEAL - DALE BRIDGES, (Appellant and Applicant) PETER OSTR.OSKY, (Owner) LAND USE PERMIT, (LPO 12131) ALAMO AREA WHEREAS, an application for a land use permit to modify Condition of Approval#10 of LP952061 to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees was received by the Community Development Department on November 11,2001; and WHEREAS, a Categorical Exemption from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(Class 4);was prepared for the project; and WHEREAS, after notice was lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the County Zoning Administrator on August 12, 2002; and WHEREAS, on August 12,2002,the County Zoning Administrator conducted a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the County Zoning Administrator having fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; and WHEREAS, on August 12, 2002, the County Zoning Administrator DENIED the request to modify condition of approval #10 of Land Use Permit#LP952061 due to the inability of the request to comply with two of the required land use findings; and WHEREAS, on August 19, 2002 an appeal was received from the Law Offices of Brian D. Thiessen on behalf of Dale Bridges requesting an appeal of the Zoning Administrators decision; and WHEREAS, after notice was lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the San Ramon Valley.Regional Planning Commission on September 18,2002; and WHEREAS, on September 18, 2002, the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission conducted a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission having fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission UPHOLDS the decision of the County Zoning Administrator and DENIES the request to modify condition #10 of Land Use Permit #LP952061, Dale Bridges (Applicant) and Peter Ostrosky (Owner); and Resolution No. 31-2002 File LP012131 San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission Page 3 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for this recommendation are as follows: 1. That the proposed conditional land use is detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the County since the proposed use is too intensive for the site, and creates traffic and pedestrian safety issues. 2. That the proposed Christmas tree sales use will create a nuisance and an enforcement problem within the neighborhood. Reliance on good faith compliance with conditions, especially the operational conditions,is not sufficient with this project since there is a history of violations and noncompliance with conditions. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission shall respectively sign and attest the certified copy of this Resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors all in accordance with the planning laws of the State of California; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the foregoing UPHOLDING of the Zoning Administrator's decision, and the DENIAL of the application was given by vote of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Conimission in a regular meeting Wednesday, September 18, 2002 as follows: The instructions by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission to prepare this Resolution were given by motion of the Planning Commission on Wednesday, September 20, 2000 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners- Neely,Ingalls and Mulvihill NOES: Commissioners—McPherson and Matsunaga ABSENT: Commissioners-Couture ABSTAIN: Commissioners -Gibson WHEREAS: in a letter dated received September 23,2002,following the decision on this application by the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission, the applicant appealed the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision. KAREN McPHERSON Chair San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California .. .... ..... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ....._.. ..... ......... ....._...... .... ......... ......... ......... ......... .............. _.........___.. ........ ...... Resolution No. 31-2002 File LP012131 San Raman Valley Regional Planning Commission Page 3 I, Dennis harry, Secretary of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission certify that the foregoing was duly called and approved on September 18,2002. ATTEST: Cp-,"'DENTNIS M. BARRY, Secretary of the San Ramon'Valley Regional Planning Commission, County of Contra Costa, State of California H:\LP012131bridges.doe STAFF REPORT September 18, 2002 Agenda Item# Community Development Contra Costa County SAINT RAMON VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION TDNT ESDAY, SEPTEs'v1BER 18, 2002.%7:30 P.M, I. LNTRODUCTIaN DALE BRIDGES A licant&Appellant) &PETER.OSTROSKY(Qwner, County Pile#LP012131: An appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision to deny the request to allow a modification to Condition of Approval##10 o LP952061.The application is to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees, a variance to the off-street parking designs and layout requirements and approval of temporary signs/displays. The subject property is located at 3212 Danville Boulevard in Alamo. (R.-B/S-2) (ZA: R-15) (CT: 3440)(-A-PN: 197-010-008) II. R.ECONEvIETINfi3ATION Staff recon nsends that the San Ramon ValleyR.egionsal Planning Commission uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator to deny the request to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas Trees. On.August 12,2002,the Zoning Administrator held a public hearing on this item and denied the request since there is no substantial evidence to support the following land use permit findings: 1) The proposed conditional land use shall not create a nuisance andlor enforcement problem within the neighborhood or community; The Zoning Administrator dete-anined the.there is no substantial evidence to support the finding. Since the original approval of the Land Use Permit 4LP952061 there have been numerous code enforcement problems associated with the site. On April 18, 2000,the County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to determine whether cause exists to revolve the permit allowing the sale of used.cars. The Board allowed the applicant time to comply with all of the Conditions of Approval, and later determined that cause did not exist to revolve the Land Use Permit. During the holiday seasons of 1999 and 2001 the applicant established a Christmas tree lot on the site without prior approval from the County. A Notice to Comply was sent to the owner and S-1 applicant on November 29, 2001 requesting the i,nnnediate abatement of the Christmas tree sales, ?Numerous co=laints have been received by the Cora unsty Development Department regarding non-compliance v,it h the conditions of approval. 2) .The proposed conditional land use shall not encourage inarginal development within the neighborhood, The Zoning.Administrator determined that there is no substantial evidence to support the finding. The establishment of a Christmas tree lot on such a small, confuned lot is inconsistent with the intent of the Retail-Business zoning district. A110-Aing such an intense use like Christmas tree sales on a lot with minimal useable area may encourage other businesses to establish uses that are not appropriate and may result in marginal development within the neighborhood. M. BAC GRJt"I2ND • May 19, 1999, the San Ramon Valley Plani:Lg Commission approved a land use permit to permanently establish a used car dealership at the subj ect property with conditions. • November-December 1999,the sale of Christmas trees occurred on- site without proper permits. • April 17, 2000, the applicant filed an application with the County to amend condition 410 of County rile OLP952061. The condition prohibited the sale of Christmas trees without a nein.land use pent-nit application. • April 18, 2000,the County Board.of Supervisors held a public hearing to determine whether cause exists to revoke the permit approved under Count=rile#LP952061 for failure to comply v�ath Conditions of Approval#1,#13, #16F and#30, • October 24, 2000, the Board of Supervisors declared its intent to reject the revocation of the Land Use Permit if I& Bridges complied with all of the conditions by December 31,2000, • October 24, 2000, in a public hearing the Board of Supervisors denied the applicants appeal and upheld the San Ramon Varley Regional Planning Commission's decision to deny modifications to Condition of Approval#10 of County Pile#LP952061 to allow tht outdoor sale of Christmas trees. • January 16, 2001, in a closed hearing the County Board of Supervisors deterred that the applicant complied with all conditions of approval and that there was no cause to revolve the permit. • November 1, 2001, an application(Pile#LP012131)to amend condition#10 of County Filewassubmitted to the Community Development Department. The applicant(Bale Bridges)requested an amendment to condition#10 of County File#L.P952061 that would allow the sale of Christmas trees on lot. • November-December 2001,the sale ofChrstmas trees occurred on- site without proper permits.A notice to comply dated November 29, 2001,was sent to the owner informing them that the sale of trees was not allowed and that the activity should cease im edieely. • August 12, 2002, during a public hearing the Zoning Adirrainistrator denied the request(County pile#L,P012131) of the applicant to modify condition#10 of County File#LP952061. I"�. ItEVI f OF APPEAR.AND STAFF RESPONSE In a letter dated. August 19, 2002 Brian D. Thiessen of the Law Offices of Brian D. Thiessen, on behalf of the applicant, formally appealed the August 12, 2002 Zoning Administrator's decision to deny County File #LP012131 requesting modification of condition #10 of County File #L,P952061. The major appeal-issues and staff's responses are outlined.below, • Summary of Aggeal Pointe The staff report for the project outlines the history between the applicant and the County. In the appeal letter the appellant cites that the applicant has dealt witth all of the matters between 41e applicant and County when they arose. Stca ffResponse: ,staff is required to provide a staff f`report to the.wearing Body containing all pertinent information, including historical information. Me importance of the historical facts surrounding the property cannot be overlooked and were used by the Zoning Administrator When making the decision. If the applicant had not continuously violated the conditions of approval for the approved permit 'County File #LP952061 j there would not of`been any "historic matters" to deal with. One of the findings that must be made prior to the issuance of a land use permit is that the use will not create a nuisance or enforcement problem. Historically, the site has been known to be an enforcement problem, S-3 requiring constant monitoring and enforcement actions. This iriforrnation is relevant to the subject application, and was included in the staff report, 9 Summary ofAMeal Point: The letter states that the concerns over the traffic impacts have been reviewed and addressed by the applicant and the Alamo Improvement Association. The conditions of approval suggested by the Alamo Improvement Association would address all of the traffic problems that might arise from the: Christmas tree sales. Sta Response: Compliance with the conditions of approval recommended by the.Alamo lrnprovernent Association would be difficult for the applicant to comply with at all times and dif f,�cult, or the county to enforce at all tunes. For example condition #5 states. "One or more traffic/parking control attendants, easily identifiable by customers as such and capable of performing this function, shall be on duty at all times that the Christmas tree sales occur. The number of attendants provided shall be as necessary to assist customers in maneuvering into and out of the parking spaces as well as assure that all of the traffic and parking related conditions of this land use permit are fully observed at all times."' Pie AZA submitted a letter.dated Aust I Z 2002 describing the parking exercises used in order to verify the feasibility of the parking layout and site plan. The AL4 determined .that there would be no parking problems during the sale of Christmas trees if the attached conditions were met. 171e Zoning Administrator expressed concerns over the amount of foot and vehicular soak that would be taking place on the site during operating hours. Summary of Appeal Points The appeal letter point out that there was no one present at the hearing to protest the application. Staff Response: T72e Zoning Administrator is required to make seven findings prior to approving any land use permit, ff ith regard to the subject application, the Zoning Administrator was not able to make two of those findings. the Zoning Administrators decision to deny the application was based on the inability of the subject application to make the required findings and not on the amount of support or protest surrounding the application. S-4 .. .._.................................................................................................................................................. ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... .... ......... ......... .....__.. ....._..._. ......... ......... ......... ......... .......... .............. . .. .. ...... ... . ... V. CONCLUSION Staff reco=--nds that the San Ramon Valley Regional Plannuag Commission deny the appeal and uphold the Zoning Admildvtrators Decision to deny!I-- request to modify Condition of Approval#10 of County File#LP95206I. GAC;arrent h'lsr in$vsrr-pIsrlS:aff ports\1201213IAPPEA STAFF.doc s jL—Q", WLYtL4SD C1.+1 TELEPHONE(525)837-3355 Vr ion b f zoo B. I7.1=5Eh' FAX(925)937-3352 - 320!DAANVMLE FC7Ui.Etr.AR_C7,SUTFE 295 ALAMO,CALiIFOR.I,TSA 94507 oxCOUNE. GER...d.LD'yV.EILTCE BILL1JO A.RON RO 19 August 2002 cr: y C:s +d Dennis Barry, Director E7 Community Development Department Contra Costa County µ ° 651 Pine St - 5th Floor c Marintez, California 54553-0095 ; rem Land use permit 012131 Deer Dennis Please consider this as the request to appeal to the San. Ramon Talley Regional Planning Commission item 0 on the 12 August 2002 Agenda of the Zoning Administrator. At that hearing I understand the Zoning Ad_-:finis trator denied the application to modify Condition 010 of 1,P 952061 -- in order to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees, etc. As you }snow, the property involved is located at 3212 Danville Boulevard in Alamo Enclosed is the applicant' s check #4275 for $125. 00 which he was told, at the hearing, would be the cost of the appeal.° The Staff Report provided a couple of days prior to the hearing raised issues that dealt with historic matters on this property, each of which had been properly dealt with at the time they arose The traffic end other issues raised in the staff report had been gone over extremely thoroughly by the .A.lamo Improvement Association' s planning volunteers and after careful review the application was supported by that local planning body because the Conditions of Approval fully and positively addressed each of those concerns My understanding is that there was no one who spoke in opposition to the application but that the Staff, and Zoning Administrator, rejected the application based on past problems that had been solved rather than the merits of the application itself, 1,4fi384S:'�'S'?tPO�Ltfiv��si.19A i GL.-L.L).L _ 5.� LiL.J.�j 1,1-:,L_ .,G V VL. Would you also be so kind as to let us know when a hearing date is being proposed before the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission so we can coordinate calendaring it and avoid conflicts . Tank you for your attention to this matter. Best regards Brian Da Thiessen BDT.n enc: as indicatd cc: Dale Bridges Peter cstrosky I.AZ381SR�T C\1,?°ppcal.l9A 2 _ _._... ......... ......... ......... ......... ........_..... . ..... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... _ ...... ......... ........................ Agenda Item # ` Corunity Development Centra Costa County COUNTY ZONNING ADNMI�ISTRATOR MONDAY, AUGUST 12. 2002, 3:30 P.M. I. Eq"PRODUCTION DALE BRIDGES (Applicant)&PETER.O TROSKY(OyMg , County File#LP012131: The applicant is requesting a modification to Condition of Approval 410 ofLP952061 to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees, a variance to the off-street parking design and layout requirements and approval'oftemporary signs/displays, The subject propert-y is located at 3212 Danville Boulevard in Alamo. (R-B/S=2) (ZA.:R.-15) (C T 3440) (ABN. 197-010-008) E. RECON VE-NDATION Staff recornmends that the Zoning Administrator deny the request to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas Trees. Staff has determined that there is no substantial evidence to support the follov ing land use permit findings: 1) The proposed conditional lana use shall not create a nuisance andfcr enforcement problem within the neighborhood or community; Staff has determined that there is no substantial evidence to support the finding. Since the original approval of the Land Use Pest#LP952061 there have been numerous code enforcement problems associated with the site. On April 18, 2000,the County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to determine whether cause exists to revoke the permit allowing the sale of used cars. The Board allowed the applicant time,to comply with all of the Conditions of Approval, and later deteranined that cause did not exist to revoke the Land Use Permit. During the holiday seasons of 1999 and 2401 the applicant established a Christmas wee lot on the site without prior approval from the County. A Notice to Comply was sent to the owner and applicant on November 29, 2001 requesting the immediate abatement of the Christmas tree sales. Numerous complaints have been received by the Comniunity Development Department regarding non-compliance with the conditions of approval. 2) The proposed conditional land use shall not encourage margbial development within the neighborhood; Staff has determined that there is no substantial evidence to support the finding. The establishment of a Christmas tree lot on such a small; confined lot is inconsistent with the intent of the Retail-;easiness zoning district.Allowing such an intense use like Christmas tree sales on a lot with rual useable area may encourage other businesses to establish uses that are not appropriate and may result in marginal development within the neighborhood. ;, CF tERAZ T-NFORMI RATION A. G=eneral Plan: The site is designated Commercial(CO), B, Zonin. : The site is zoned Retail business/Sign control combining district(R-B/S_2) C, Q.EQA Status: Categorical Exemption, Class 4-Minor Temporary ase of Land having negligible or no permanent effects on the emdrorinnent, including the sale of Christmas trees. D. Previous Applications: Co=ty File#LP952061:A land u.se permit to continue a used.car dealership was approved by the County on May 19, 1599. County File-4LP002035:A request to modify condition#10 of County File 0,LP952061.The Board.of Supen cors denied the request. Regulators Programs: 1. Active Fault Zone: The site is not within an active fault zone. 2, Flood.Hazard Area: A portion of the site is located within the 100-year flood zone, or flood zone `A'. ................................... ................................... .............................................................. ......... ......... .................. ............................................................................. ......... ......... ....................... ......... ......... ......... ......... .......... 1 60 dB A Noise Control Zone; The site is within the 60dBA.noisw control zone. 4. R.edevelovr ent District. The site is not wig a redevelopment district. IV. STITEIAR.EA DESCRIPTION The property is approximately one half of an acre and is looted south of Stone Valley Road and east of Danville Boulevard. To the east of the property is San Ramon Creek. Ether business offices are located to the immediate north of the Property. The surrounding area is predominantly retail business and office- use. Aused oar dealership operates out ofthe facility. Currently, three structures exist on the site. A storage shed in the rear, a sales office/garage in the center of the site and a detached carport near the L-ont of the site.Frontage improvements have been made and parking spaces provided per the conditions of approval of County File#LP952061, V. BACKGROUND * May 19, 1999, the San Ramon Valley Planning Commission approved a land use permit to permanently establish a used car dealership at the subj ect property with conditions. • November-December 1999,the sale of Christmas trees occurred on- site without proper permits. .April 17, 2000, the applicant riled an application with the County to amend condition,#10 of County File 4LP952061. The condition prohibited the sale of Christmas trees without a new land use permit application. .April 18,2000, the County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to determine whether cause exists to revoke the permit approved ander County File#LP952061 for failure to comply with..Conditions of Approval.#1, #13, #16F and.#30. October 24, 2000,the Board of Supervisors declared its intent to reject the revocation.of the Land.Use Permit if 14r. Bridges complied with all of the conditions by December 3 1,2000. October 24, 2000, in a public hem g the Board of Supervisors denied the applicants appeal and upheld the San.Ramon Valley Regional Pla-=g Commission's decision to deny modifications to Condition of Approval#10 of County File#LP952061 to aEow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees. January 16, 2001, in a closed bearing the County Board of Supervisors determined that the applicant complied with all conditions of approval and that there was no cause to revoke the perrnit. ! November 1, 2001, an application(File#LP012131)to amend condition#10 of County File was submitted to the Community Development Department. The applicant(Dale Bridges)requested an amendment to condition#10 of County File#LP 952051 that would allow the sale of Christmas trees on lot. s November-December 2001,the sale of Christmas trees occurred on- site without proper permits. A notice to comply dated November 29, 2001,was sent to the owner informing them that the sale of trees was not allowed and that the activity should cease immediately. Vi. PROPOSED PROJECT The applicant is proposing to sell Christmas trees from the premises during the holiday season.During that time the car dealership will be closed and the automobiles stored.of-site. Customers will have the option to load their tree. on site,or have the tree delivered to their homes. The proposed tree lot will operate froze approximately one week before Thanksgiving and is expected to conclude the 23r° and.24" of December. Following cleanup, the applicant will resume the sale of used vehicles, on or about December 30t`. The applicant is proposing to install a temporary 8-foot chain link fence enclosure around the northern half of the property for storage of the trees. Seven parking spaces will be set-aside for customer and employee parking. Access to the tree sales and parking area will be from Danville Boulevard through an existing driveway located on the southern portion of the property. The sale of trees will take place in a 92' x 64' area on the northern half of the property. '`he area where the trees gill be sold and stored will be fenced for security reasons. In the center of the tree sales area, the applicant is proposing to place a 12-foot high fiberglass Santa. Existing parking spaces in the southern half of the site normally reserved for the display of vehicles will be utilized to provide parking for employees and customers. Five additional parking spaces and valet parking will be provided within:the public right-of way on Danville Boulevard. ......... .. ...... ................ ..........................................._....._ ..........................................................................................____.. ......... ......... ......... ............................................_........._..................... ...... ......... ......... ......... ........ ........................................................................................................................ ........................................................................._...............____.. The applicant has indicated that delivel'y of trees to the site would occur in mid-Novernber. Approximately three t-Lickloads; oftrees will be delivered to the site during various hours of the day. VIL PUBLir, CoNfNMN7S Daniel Smith: A number of complaints have been received from MIT. Smith who owns a business adjacent to the subject property, Most oIfthe complaints have to do with the applicant's alleged violations of the Condition of Approval of County file#LP95 206 1. A series of complaints were received from Mr. Smith during the 2001 Holiday Season. StaffResvonse: County staff has spent numerous hours enforcing the Conditions of�4pprovalfor the Bridges Car lot. ne impact that the tree lot would have on the neighboring businesses could be significant and require additional County staff time to regulate. AGENCY QONLNffiN-TS Alamo improvement Association: Two memorandums were received by the County from the Alamo Improvement Association. The first, dated November 26,200 1, recommended approval of the application with conditions. The recommended conditions and staffresponse are as followed: 1. All stipulations and representations of Nfr,Bridge's letter of 10/31/01. and attached site plan shall be conditions of approval of any amendment of this land use permit, including the applicability of the amendment to the Christmas tree sales season of year 2001 only. Staff Response:If staff were to recommend approval of the amendment the stipulations and representations of Mr. Bridges letter would be appropriate. 2. On site parking of a minimum of six spaces shall meet County dim- ensional.requirements for stall size and back-out dimension �'Note; this should be a 90 degree configuration due to the dead end shape of the parking layout). A revised parking layout meeting these requirements shall be provided to the County and the AIA,prior to the County's on this requested lend use permit amendment. StaiffResvonse: Yhe parking on the site plans Submitted June 10, 2002, does not meet the Stall SL;Ze 07'sire reqW7'elnents of the Ondinance. R' staff were to approve the request, variance approval would be required. Traffic controLer(s)will.patrol the on-site parking area and the business par-king areas located in front of adjacent business to the north. StaffRes,,)onse: Enforcing this condition naay be d,,,cult. 4. ".No Christmas Tree Parking"signs will be provided by applicant and posted in front of adjacent business to the north. Sta Response.°Enforcing this condition nsay be di,�icult. 5, No use whatsoever of adjacent business driveway located i=ediately to the.north. Staff'Res orise: See above rrespolzse. 6, Chain linI fencing on all sides of tree area covered with plastic sheeting on creek side and on the north side to a point aligning with business to north.. StaffRes ap rise: If the pr oposal were to be approved this condition would apply, 7, Santa display figure to be located at ground level(not on top of building) and well back from.the Danville Boulevard frontage (as shown on Mr.Bridges' site plan), Sta ffRe.sponse: If the proposal were to be approved this condition would apply. 8. Subsequent review public hearing immediately(within first quarter of 2002) fallowing seasonal use to determine renewal or non-renewal of seasonal permit. Staff Response:.If the proposal were to be approved this condition would appZy. The recommendation of staff is based on the inability to snake all seven of the required land use findings. Because staff has not found substantial evidence to support two of the required findings,staff recommends denial. It is not clear if the reconvnendation of the AIA was based on making the required findings, and how the findings were made. The second memo, dated March 19, 2002, stated that the AIA had concerns regarding on-site parking and requested that the applicant provide detailed parking area details. The application hearing was ........................................................................___.. ......... ............................. ..............................._ .................................. ......... ......._.. ......................................................... .............................. ................................................. .. continuled to the k-pril meeting. No minutes have been received from the AIA since. The.revised plans submitted by the applicant on June 10,2002, The revised plans show six parking spaces that do not meet the county parking requirements. Public Works Department. In a memo dated July 25,2002 the Public Torks Department reports that the applicant has two outstanding bills for the two previous applications: LP 2061-95 Amount Due: $3,918.17 LP2039-00 Amount Due: 10, 921.14 The Public Forks Department recommends that this current application not be considered until the applicant has paid the bills on the previous two applications. Public Works has no other comments or conditions of approval. San.Ramon Valley Fire Protection District;leo Comment IX STAFF ANA YSISOISCUSSIONT A. Auoropriateness of Use Staff has determined that the proposed amendment to condition of approval.#10 would allow a use that is not appropriate for the subject site. Allowing the sale of Christmas trees on the site would promote marginal development within.the County and would create a nuisance and enforcement problem within the community. Approval of such a use on such a confined lot would promote marginal development within the neighborhood as well as promote marginal uses within the Retail-BusinessCR-B) zoning district. Approval of such an intensive use on the subject lot may encourage other inappropriate,non- compatible activities within the neighborhood. Typically, Christmas tree sales take place in a rural area or whin a large open area, such as a large parking lot, allowing ample space for tree shoppers,children, employees,parking and other activities related to the sale of Cluistmas trees. Less than half of the .43-acre lot can be utilized for the sale of trees. B. Site flan Analysis The .43-acre site is dissected by San.Ramon. Creek. A revised site plan was submitted to the Community Development Department on June 10, 2002, Only half of the site is used for the sale of cars and the tree sales because of the location ofthe creek. The site fronts on 162-feet of Danville Boulevard. The submitted site,plan shows the location of the tree sales area,parking and loading,area. The tree sales area will be completely fenced off from the parking area. Five parking spaces will be provided on site,plus one parking space reserved for the delivery truck. The proposed parking spaces will be accessed from a driveway off of Danville Boulevard. The site plan dated June 10,2402 shows 6 parking spaces just north of the creek. The proposed parking spaces do not comply with the parking design standards of.the ordinance. C, Traffic The proposed use will increase traffic to the site for the duration of the tree sales. The site is located on a main thoroughfare in the Alamo area, 'Traffic is normally heavy along Danville Boulevard, and is generally congested during commute hours. The Christmas tree lot vnill increase traffic along Danville Boulevard, especially during peak hours. The impact may be marginal,but previous attempts to sell trees at the site have produced traffic problems (see letter dated November 26, 2001 from AIA). The safety of the off-street parking is also a concern. A couple of the spaces provided appear to require backing up onto Danville Boulevard in order to exit,this is not permitted by ordinance and is a safety concern. The applicant has proposed to provide a parking attendant on-site during tree sales. This will provide some relief to the parking and traffic cone erns,but it may not address all of the County's concerns. Enforcing a traffic attendant on site may require additional county time to monitor. D. CenergLg �� The site is within.the Commercial(CO) General flan District. This designation allows for a broad range of cormnercial uses typically found in smaller scale neighborhood, community and thoroughfare commerci al districts.The request to establish Cluistaas tree sales at the site is compatible vn�th the lard use designation. General Plan Policies: 3-143. "Encourage coinmercial development that is related to the needs off-he neighborhood and community. Regional scale shopping centers a:e not considered appropriate." The applicant's request to allow the sale of Christmas trees on site complies with the General Plan Policies 'of the k1amo-Diablo- Blackhawk area, E. Zordna Com-oliance Co=liance with Retail-Business District: The outdoor sale off Christmas trees is a use allowed within the district upon the issuance of a land use permit. The existing structures on-site were approved with previous entitlements. No new structures are proposed. EgLkLm_g: §82-16.018 of the County Ordinance requires one parking space for every two employees. The applicant has stated that there will be a maximum of six employees working the sit-- at any given time. A total of three (3)parking spaces will' be required,per county ordinance. The applicant is proposing to provide six (6) off-street parking spaces. Three of the spaces are required, and the other three are additional spaces. The off street parking does not meet the design and layout requirements of the ordinance. The ordinance also requires parking areas of more than five parking spaces to provide, in addition to the required parking area, an area equal to not less than.five percent of the total parking area devoted to Landscaping. Of the 6 parking spaces provided,only one meets the stall size and driveway width requirements. The other five spaces provided on site do not meet the size or driveway width recrairements, The applicant has requested a variance to the off-street parking standards. The fmdings for approval of the variance could be made.However Land Use Permit Findings cannot,be made. Sim Control Com. -oliance, The applicant is proposing to display a 12-.foot Santa and various sips during tree sales.The Santa figure will be placed on the lot next to sales office. The applicant will also put up temporary adveftisement and directional signs to facilitate parking on site. The signs will be displayed only during tree sales, and will,be removed when the sales cease. These"temporary"signs are in compliance with the S2 sign-combining district. X: CONCLUSIONS Staff has deterx ned that the proposed modification to the Conditions of Approval of Land Use Permit#Lp952061 would allow a use that is not appropriate for the site because of the size and location of the site and the intensity of the use proposed. ..y+�. q;n TO BE CC#MPLETED BYAPPLLIC TT/OWINTER MWEl APPLICANT �2._Ine l 0 Dame tddr, 7 f L aj4 g ,qF ac? Address Z! . ta,4/l" � ..btyy . Ag r_' City, state - 4LR 4iry .a P i. d' 'haae Zip_ 5"rr m PaanZ '-�` :+r` zip 'f 3d~signing below,owner agrees to pay sIlas ,incliding any By signing bcl+ow,the applicant agrees to pay a.11 costs for E.cc "ed Interest if costs not paid by the applicant. processing this application,plus any accrued interest if costs not ' heclti here if billanas are to be sent to applicant rather fnzn paid urifain.30 days of invoic` s. Mnex, � O�c er's Signature Applicant's Sig at=e CONTIA.CT PER�SQINI(optional) PROJECT DATA APPLICATIDNL TYPE NTam.e X, r2-c Total Parcel Size M Development Plan Address �'fr. _ "Number of Units 0 LaadUsePerrri.t CII-IY,Sitate AL4,s c �p €�F Estimated Protect alae :1 DP(LL�F Combo Phones i 6 zip '-t t, C=Mt.l.Txtd. Sq.Footage -- d Other ITtunr ofy bequest: lkttachupplementI -statement e .L; OFFICE USE ONLY Appli.cationDescription; 4 L `--,,�9 5a ( ` Properly Descaiptian: 11-1 Ordin .ceR.ef. Type of Fee:. FXE.AMQ h'T: 5-CODE, Assessor's No. *Base Fee/Deposit. $ b p' � , btw_ ( `Late F`Tz Pena'4 $ S-0b5 Site Acidr.s 3� �n ,` o, , Pira Dist. <-' �^ Gti (if spplxca�alc-50%of ab��e; y 1 oning District rJ " Sphere of ucnce #Units x I95 $ �` S-014 CDivelopE=a ) Census Tract -9 Flood Zone_ _ Sq.F:,.X.20 $ _ 5-01.4 — PanelNo, 1/2%vslum o=$100.000 $�� S-0"9 Atlas Page I � ,off esu.1'rojaatValue LUP) � X-trefHICS -- Natia cstian Fee $ 5-0528 General,Plan ° #A.ddmsm x SIM+$30 Supervisorial mist. ° Fish&Gatnt Posting S 5-048 I�.oC'd by Environmental Health S 33.00 5884 Concurrent Files: Date Filed j(/I j(/I6 f I Other S TOTAL S !' Receipt 4 File Number E - O tiler P AMD-L 711 ON 5 B oNx ms—ANm MFT f.LS '%'Il.L a`+~B+:fiG=AFm 5I'.4�7 COSTS.—...=B A, Sat PLANNING INQUIRY -- ENTER PARCEL NER 197 - 010 - 008 PCL NO 197-010-008-5 SITE 3212 DANnVILLE ELITD R�Plylo USE CODE 36 10000% S �%R OSmROSNY PETER NOTF 17 SUGARLOAF TERR. 94507 ALA40 CA 7PLiAA?Tg7jjG PLANARF To **** TRA 66386 **** SPEC/RED PLA14 FROM CO SERV AREA. L-100 P2.aK DE'D LAND- 88,678 EMS -- 1 ZONEE A ZOIQTNG R-E/S-2 R-13 IXPR- 1,492 EMS - 1 ZONE C CENSUS 'TRACT 3440.00 TOIL- 90;170 ENS - 1 ZONE D SEISMIC ZN CO SERV AREA F-2 G""PN Z PLAN CO FLD HZD ZN EL CO SERV AREA P-6 SCHOOL FEE DRNNGE EEE 2552 CO SVC A.R. P-2 ZN E SUP DIST 3 ACREAGE 0.430 CO SVC -A-R R-7 ZN A DESC POR RO 5=N R.AMON SAN R;dMON VLY FIRE **AE'PL1CATTONS** CC RES COn7`SV AG Dtp PL NO. CD DESC LOT C APP RCVD HRNG/FNL ST MOSQUITO A.PATE 1 CC P.N., LP002039 LP 04/16/20 CEIv`"I`RAL SANInZLRY CC SPL LP982047 LP 07/13/19 EAST RAY YLUD CC PL LP952061 LP A 07/20/19 HS UST BAY REv1bL PK CC PL C RF922052 RF 03/26/19 07/07/19 C 11/01/2001 LF?12763 H-"-r vA1 FOR C)VZR_I'LOW LF'F'2763 -'"•. C C `" T u � ..'3' ;° 11,2" Tday 7, 2002 'o 'Whom It May Concern: Subject: 3212 Danville Blvd.,Bridges Christmas Trees of Alamo As the owner of 2a Danville Blvd,, in Alamo,I Peter Ostrosky, give my perm.ssion and ffill support to Dale Bridges in his continuing endeavor of Bridges Chrstnas'gees of Alamo at said location. Providing that Dale Bridges adheres to all the conditions set for by the.Alamo Improvement Association.and Contra Costa Couat,. It is my feeling that Bridges Comas Trees o-f.Alamo is an added attraction during the holiday season and is a welcome site along Danville Blvd., in Alamo. Sincerely, Peter Ostrosky t �' 3 t�tyaf Nib+•Gt. �� '�,+ tP ,.»•LLL ' } i''� r •Q'k .� � f�t � S s � a •a�yw �"' Ali` t .�as z+ 9 •' y u +c ,*.tea\ �+ a ...•L r S '7f. c� a F u� Ell .. \ ,r• ..dy ��''i ` y,# y \alk Wit"" r ,F,. r 1 .++.acs.1.w .u, .ed»' •�.... y " a`=N6 .tom�t sp �® cd CAUFORMA DEALER #2 Motors 3212 Dtaraville BauleX�ard, Alamo, California 94507 �1Aiamo (925) 838-1801 Office !925) 838-1808 far Web-Eire: It1177,..BRIDGEShdOTORSO ALAMO.COIYI October 25, 200, Contra Cosa County Community Development Department. Attn: Rubin Hernandez 551 Rine Street 4'Floor North' mg Martinez, CA, 9&4553-1229 Dear Rubin, We have been.overwhelmed by requests to have a.local"Home-Town Christmas Tree Lot"in Alamo. Our site(see attached drawings)is tryizsg to keep it very real, friendly, fin, simile and safe. We ha-m on-site pig on the south side of the property. This is a big omcession with over 2510 of the lot for on-site customer parldng. NO chain saws at ail will be used during tae Holiday Season. NO flocking of any trees will be none at this locatim.NO generators will be used and we will provide fencing to make ythe location look good with the spirit of tie Home Town Cute Christmas Tree lot. The folks in Adamo needthis for the "Children of America"" (our theme) to vxpvrl acea With everythingthat is c ig on in our nation,peon}a are hesitmt to �t far Lrow.home and are looking for a snail, localized Christmas Tree Lott. '.t`1!ey are staying away from the large mails and staying close to home to have a Christy memory for their children with,photos of Sam and-Mrs. Claus. Give the locals a chance for some fon Holiday spirit,please say"yes"to our Home Town Christ=:Tree lot located in Alamo at Bridges Chnistrnas Trees of Alamo,where the ringing of Christmas aaer can be heard throughout,the Valley, 11he people of Amo do want a local Christinas tree lot, and they love our location. Let's get beck to what*the meaning of Christmas is all about,bringing people together with Christnas Cheer,hot apple cider and the smell of Christmas trees. As we low family and togetherness are more iWt ortant than anything else. Let`s give the people of Alamo a sense of what a small town can offer, fean and sa�r. Sincerely, r i Dale L Bridgb r1L5$f"7Lc�i" ^ ZS�LZ ixC7i S]G 1°Gs 11.`��f >E L i t✓0 Business" t rP1.U- 'SL's AZLrD '`UkP1' Oar^P V' Swt:-. i r r i N Pj n } 191 I LLJ 72 LLJ IT Cn / S,ndl a.81,Li',6BN it N83'L78 3S19Yt®P121lAi HJ.yri IM"U P11_MIYH9 MOTH iGitld d I '.'C5 SN3F'J1¢3AW1 tlWV7Y; li 1•,tjgW r PUBLIC STORKS DEPARTMENT CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 17.ATE: lul3,25, 2002 TO: Ruben Hernandez, Provect Planner,Community Development FROM: ler�T Pa�1y� Associate Civil Engineer,Engineering Service SUBJECT: PERMIT LP 2131-02: STAFF REPORT & CONDITI?TS F APPROVAL (Bridges Motors /Danville Blvd Alamo Area/APN,r 197-010-008) FILE® LP 2131-02 We gave re-Viewed the site plan to eapandthe allowed use of the Bridges Motors' site to include the sale of Cba st as trees. The applicant filed for a similar land use pe=h in.2000,under LP 2039-00. 1 us cu Trent application. and the previous application proposed an amendment to the previously approved Land Use Pernait 206-1-95. LP 20139-00 was denied by the Board of Supervisors. Public"Works issaes d LP 2039-00 were that the applicant had not compliedmerith the Conditions of Approval set in LP 2061-95. public Works is working to clear up some minor issues Nvit7a LP 2061-95. However.there are still,outstanding bills for both previous land use per=+s., Our accour-ftin,g records indicatethat the applicant still awes the following amounts .for the two previous applica;.ions: LP 2061-95 Ax aunt.Due: $3.918.17 1..P 2039-00 Amount Due: $10, 921.1,1 The Public Works Department reco=ends that this current application not be considered ental the applicant has paid the bills on the previous two applications. Public'Vi7orks has no other co=n nts or conditions of approval. lfyou have any questions,please call me at (925)) X13-22'76, 7F;jf G:1 rpl} ta' n�S�cUvrr 1200?\3�1}llp�I3I42.doc cc: K Serviicw M.Morton,Engineering Senicts B.Chis5urr,Accounting D.Bndps,3212 Dan—villt Bled,Alamo:GA 9450? FILA':LP 2039-00 FILE:LP 2061-9$ .JAMS..,.•% RP UVLa I t T 1 L UN - Pic fru .,ty I� o-0. 5Cn m kl.*10, CU PODNIA 9 i $ (925) 866-3606 NoveILber 26, 2001 BY FAX TO 33541222 Cornsu nity Development Dept. X 5 11 Pirie St., � Floor, N. 'Wing Martinez, CA 9453360095 Attn: Rueben Hernandez Re: LP01-213 l Site: 3212 Danville Blvd - Amendment to Land Use Perrrdt 9LP95-2061 to allow the sale of Christmas gees (condition#10). Dear 1\Ir, Hernandez: Subject application was reviewed by the Alarno Improvement Association°s Planning Committee on November 1 �', and by our Board the following night. .Dale Bridges presented current application and detailed changes from previous(2 years ago) application, ne changes include on-site parking, chain link fencing and plastic sleeting to maintain en-closure and control debris, traffic controller(s) will patrol parl-nng areas and adjacent paeking areas, "No Christmas Tree Par ng" signs vU be prop ided and posted in front of businesses adjacent to the north, Santa display will be at ground level and not or,top ofbuildinig., There ryas siccant disclassion on past problems (particularly=on parldn.g and traffic) and the need to resole the problems satisfactorily, The application was recommended for approval for the 2001 season only with the following conditi6ns: I. All stipulations and representations of r& Bridges' letter of 10/31./01 and attached site plan shall be conditions of approval of any amendment of this land use permit, including the applicability of the arnendment to the Christmas tree sales season of year 2001 only. 2. On-site parking of a m:Lnirn= of six spaces shall meet County dimensional requirements for stall. size and back-out dis-mension (Note: this should be in a 90 degree configuration due to the dead-- end shape of the parlYin.g plan layout). A revised parldng layout sneering these requirements shall be prodded to the.County and to the ALA.prier to the County's bearing on this requested land use permit a-nendment, 3_ Trac controllers) will patrol the on-site parki g, area and the business pari;ing areas located ian from, of adjacent businesses to the north. 4 `'leo Christmas Tree Pal-king" signs will be provided by applicant and posted in, front of adjacent businesses to the north. 5 No use whatsoever of adjacent business driveway located immediately to the north, P-0, 50-� 27i LAMO, 945D7 ( ;) 866-3606 6, Chain Iiia:fencing on all sides of tree area covered with plastic sheeting on creek side and on the north side to a point all gn r_g with front of businesses to nort�h. ?, Saito display figure to be located at ground level (not on top of budding and well back from the Danville Boulevard frontage (as shown in NL Bridges' site plan). 8. Subsequent re-,ieww public bearing in=ediatel��(within first quarter of 2002)follow-Jing seasonal use to d.ete=,Lie rerse=wal or norms-renewal of seasonal permit. it is clearly understood that Mr. Bridges shall secure the necessary amendment by the County of this land use permit prior to beginning operation. atter}uon to our concerns. Thad `ou Lor year og rnr= hah an laninirig Committee Dale Bridtes Fater Ostrosky fIX'F ;.-D 7-vlr8 p. ,(D, CtJiMNIA 745M (7.5) 866-35606 �. Nirarch 19, 2002 - 2 5 5 Pa M 4 o 1 4 2 MR 'RY FAX TO zl5-1222 or , u_-dty Development Dept. 651 Pine St., e Floor,N.wisng �,�artsnez,_CA. 94533-0055 Attn: Ruben Hernandez Re: LP 01-2131 Site. 3212 Danville Blvd. Scheduled review of orginal recommendation for use of site to sell Christmas trees. Zoning R-BIS-2. DI-arMr. Hamandez: Subject application was reviewed by the Alamo hnprovernent Association's P'laxu 9 Com:�rnittee on March 13 h, and by our Board the following night. Dale Bridges presented a detailed review ofthe application process, including the County requirement of a one year wait before reapplication starting before the 2000 Holiday season and ends-ng in late October of 2001 and the subsequent attempt to start this process for the 2005 Holiday season that was ,not able to be completed. He reviewed his procedures and compliance with the conditions shown in our letter of.Novernber 26th. We understand that the application in process is now amended to be for the upcoming 2002 holiday season. she insurance broker for this business was present and spoke about their inspection- site visit of the facility and that it met their underwriting requirements. A statement frorn the broker.is attached. It notes that the underwriter-nay req-=e a parking attendant to oversee parking as a requirement for coverage. There was significant discussion about historical problems ofparking, traffic, noise, etc. There was continued concern expressed by Dr. Daniel Smith about problems impacting his business located i=nediately to the north on Danville Blvd. A review of the business hours, noise abatement measures revealed the lot closed before 8:00PM and no gas or electrical sags were used. After significant reg ewr, questions remain about the parking area and the config-L-ation for sig spaces. Dale has been asked to provide a detailed parking area drawing for review by the Board and subsequent update to our letter ofNovernber 26th. Application continued to the Board's April meeting. S. T1ely$ I - oger t. Srnit Chau-r:�an PlanrLirg von�.ittee cc; .ALk Secretary Vale Bridges Peter Ostrosk}? t s� a 'i its t VlV7CFtXKtlilf�tJtV1�1Vf� osia NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PROGRAM tC fii 5 Pile Street, 4th Flog Martinez, Cal-fonia 94553-0152 c PCO ~1-25) 335-i 1 I i NPP 1925) 335-1137 r. - Fp- 19251 546-4450 i November 29, 2001 Peter Ostrosky. 17 Sugarloaf Terrace Alamo, CA 94507 SITE; 3212 Darnville Blvd., Alamo APN: 157-010-0085 FIEF: RF010867 - FFC100219 NOTICE TO COMPLY You are hereby notified this department has observed your property at the above location and determined it is apparently in violation of the Contra Costa County Zoning or Building Ordinance Code for the following reason/s; Violation Cescription and County 2rdinanoe Code Section 1. Warehouse storage and distribution center for Christmas trees within R-B Metall business district, Sec.82-2..002 &82-2.006 (Seca 84-52.402 Uses permitted within R-B zoning) You are hereby notified to clear the above violation/s. Corrective Action 1 serove all Christmas trees and associated equipment, to also include delivery vehicle, fencing, signage and display Items from property. An investigation has begun and compliance is required to correct the above violations. Permits or land use compliance may be required. A code enforcement fee shall be charged equal to two times the amount of all-permit fees. Zoning violation clearances requires a minimum of a$100.00 fee, A fee of $25.40 pgr trip will be charged until compliance is met. The fees are additive to the building permitfzoning fees. Failure to comply with this notice within 7 days shall cause this office to take one or more of the following actionls. Record "Notice of Violation" on property records Deter to County Counsel/City Attorney for legal action - court appearance Issue a Citation- Court appearance, penalties and fines. Acetify the Franchise Tax Board (On rental units declared substandard). Obtain abatement order- All costs plus administrative fees bliled to owner I may be reached at 1925) 335-1142 any workday between 7:30 and 10:00 am. Our offices are closed the first, third and fifth Fridays of every month: Sincerely, Phil Ludolph Building inspector PAL:klh NO'TIGE'0 COMPLY.10tr cc: Occupant Cale Bridges 3212 Danville Blvd Alamo, CA 94507 _......... __ ........................................................................................................... .._._.._....................................................................................................................................................................... .................................................................................................... ......... ......... ......... .......... ....... ......... .. ....... ......._.. .. .......................................... ......__. v j ' 1, . :� 1 une 285 2C)O2 To7horra It May Concern: This letter is cone ;rni�sgBridges Christmas Tvees- O'Alcrmo employees parking during the tree-selling season. ?lease be ad-wised., we are hereby confirming' our agreement with 1� . bale Bridges that his employees may park their vehicles on our premises dut;ing the b-ristrnas holiday season f'roin November 25:n to December 241, 2002, We °-ust this communication will absoli,-e ycur concerns v,,ith regard to the location at which the c=loytes will park their vaEc-les during this period. Sincerely, i Katy Mlaggll no Business A#Lin.ist;rator, � Y ,G Dar)ville Boulevard Alamo, alefornia 94507 ttll' 925 820.9031 fax 925 0 9^ 4 A . lNflay 13, 2002 v.2 Mt�I 114 P is a Alamo Improvement.association nichael Gibson, Chairman P. Q. Box 271. Alamo, CA 94507 Re- Bridges Motors Christmas tree lot Dear Alamo Improvement Association.: ane AIA provided a letter to Contra Costa County Comm. unity Developnient Dept. on Noveniber 26, 2001 with several conditions requested. of Mr. Bridges to be met prior to the fill approval of the AIA.Board. There have been several meetings in the past two months to discuss this application ande conditions set forth by the ATA prior to its approval. One of these conditions made last November was that there would be made available traffic controller(s)to patrol parking areas and adjacent parking areas. Another was to proiide tin-site parking of minimum of sax spaces,which shall met County dimensional requireanents for stall size and back out dimensions. The AIA f1brther noted that the parking stalls should be in.a 90-degree con fixation due to the dead.-end shape of*,lie parking plan layout. At the ATA Board meeting in March 2002 the AIA requested fbom Mr. Bridges a blixprint approved by an engineer to demonstrate how this parking could occur as the size of'the lot is in question for this to occur. These six stalls were requested by the AIA. due to the increased volume of traffic during tree sales,parking and saf�ty problems and the need to resolve these concerns. 'Would you please prude for our records documentation as to your now gathered information,which meets these County dimensional requirements as the AIA.set forth` Also,please comment on how the large white Bridges Motors Christmas Tree delivery truck wM parr in one of these parr stalls, driN ing in and out to make its d .y deliveries wi` out interruption of the exT5cted frequent customer traffic coming into park in these sig on.-site pang stalls. Now that the AIA has taken the position to approve the tree lot for next year would the board consider a com Tx--dcation line that residents and businesses can file complaints as they occur and to assist in solving problems during this five-week period the tee lot is open fo*business. It has been well documented that the CCC Sheriff's Dept and CF2 are not equipped to handle traffic and parking complaints such as these. Thank you for your time. W Karl NTiyati— Ov,rner of Property at 3206-320S-3210 Dam, - Blvd 75 Tracy Court Alarro, CA 94507 cc. Supervisor Gerber, CCCCDD, SRVPC, Daniel S. S=th, D,C. Bridges Christmas Tree Of Alanio . ,,.Bridges Christmas Trees ofAlaino Member -of t o e Paciffe Northwest Chratmas Tree Association for 4 years. This Years Tree Sensor, Starts. 'November 16, 2002 but that down It mane you cant t get a dead start and :order your Tree, Wreath, andlor Garland odkil f Latest News: This year we will have Valet.Parki.ngfor all of are wonderful customers. A Iso, come by apd, ick up your FRE b.,tp;lOwv,,w.bridgesmotorsoNamo.co-,nitrtepages/rnaintrees.btrrJ 4I.3/02 .Mistletoe. Order Your Tree Today. Gift Certificates available. CaCC Q.R WRII`E WRITECJS TODAY!tI r r 32'.12 Da,(7villeB vd. Alttmo, CA. 9-:1507 7`x— €9251)839-.1SO1 http;/f ,%-wridgmrnotorso .i oxorrAreepagesfx.* intrees.htn' 4/113/02 i'r�r T"re Country;,"'nt'�g PO. 50T,271 e hl,nh10,CALffO 947077 • (925)856-3 August 2,2002 PA E-mail to rhern cd.co.contra-costa.ca.us" and U.S.flail Rueben Hennandez Community Development Department 651 Pine Street, 4:t,Floor,North ding Martinez,California 94553 RBS Land.Use Permit#LP01-2131-3212 Danville Blvd Amendment to Land Use Permit#LP95-2061 to allow the sale of Christmas Trees Dear Mr,Hernandez: The Alamo Improvement Association Planning Committee and Board of Directors reviewed this application on several occasions during the months of March through May,2002, including a site visit to more closely assess proposed parking movements. At its May 2002 meeting, the Board of Directors voted to recommend that the County approve an amendment to the above-referenced land use permit to allow sale of Christmas trees at the site, subject to the following conditions, all of which have been agreed to by the Applicant,Mn Bridges: CONDMONS 1, This amendment shall authorize temporary Christmas tree sale use at the 3212 Dal;vil.le Boulevard property(the "Site") only once, for the 2002 season. Further use of the Sh for Christmas tree sales shall require a further amendment of he subject land use permit: N Christmas tree sales are to be sought for the season(s) of 2403 or later, application for such amendment shall be made. — and the application referred to the AZA for its normal review within the first quarter of the year for which the use is sought. 2. All required County permits and/or approvals shall be secured before commencement of any preparation or use of the Site for Christmas tree sales. I The Christmas tree sales operation at the Site,including set up and removal of t-ee inventory, fencing, equipment, etc. shall begin not earlier than November 25, 2002 and shall end not later than December 27, 2002. 4. The Site shall be laid out and operated in ful`. conformance with the attached Site Plan and Site Plan Enlargement drawings (collectively the "Plan"). Except for a slightly revised location for the Santa Claus display figure and several shaded annotations added to ensure clarity of several conditions below, the Plait is identical to the site plan submitted by the Applicant entitled "Parking T ayout—Bridges Christmas Tree Sales",prepared by DeBolt Civil Engineerng, dated 4-8-02 and revision dated 4-22-02. Reuben Hernandez Community development Departr;-ient August 2,2002 Nage 2 5. One or more traffic/parking control attendants, easily identifiable by customers as such and capable of performing this function, shall be on duty at all tinges that Christmas tree sales occur. The number of attendants provided shall be as necessary to assist customers in maneuvering into and out of the parking spaces as well as assure that all of the traffic and parking-related conditions of this land use.permit are ffully observed at all times. 5. As indicated in the Applicant's October 31, 2001 letter and attached site plan, and as reconfirmed in the Applicant's subsequent submittals to the AIA an 2002, valet panting service shall be made available to customers at all times when none of the customer parking shown on the Pian is available. 7. The on-site parking area, including both the maneuvering area (shown shaded on the Plan) and the parking stalls shall at all times be kept free of merchandise, equipment, customer loading activities or any other obstruction., except when loading and unloading delivered inventory as described in Condition 8 below. 8. Loading and unloading ofsupplias or inventory from tricks shall occur only within the Site and not within the Danville Boulevard right-of-way. The Applicant has agreed that this N',U occur by backing the trucks into the parking area of the Site during times'when Christmas tree sales are closed and the parking area is not needed, 9, The track used for delivery of Christmas trees to customers shall park and load`unload only within the parking space designated"Truck Parking Only"on the Plan. 10. Loading of Christmas trees onto or into customer vehicles shall occur only in spaces designated for customer parking in the Pian., excepting the red painted cur area noted in Condition 14 below. 11. No parking whatsoever related to the Christmas tree operation shall occur upon or in front of the property to the north of the Site `see annotation of Plan), It is the responsibility of the Applicant to assure that its customers as well comply with this condition. II Suoject to the approval of the applicable landowner(s), the Applicant shall provide "No Christmas Tree Parking"sig at the property to*the north of the Site. The Applicant shall make reasonable efforts to accommodate any criteria of the landowner(s) for such signage. The Applicant shall,install the signage prior to the beginning of maintain it during and rezrove it upon the ending of the period of Christmas tree use of the site. 13. During Christmas tree sales use of the Site,there shall be no parking or other use whatsoever of the driveway shared by the Site with the property adjacent to the north (see annotation of Plan). It is the responsibility of the Applicant to assure that its customers as well comply 'Ad this condition.. Reuben Hernandez Co ;unit;,Development Departrnp-rit August 2,2002 Page 3 14. Contrary to the Applicant's originally submitted 4-22-02 site plan, customer parking shall not be permitted tted along the-existing red-painted curb imm, ediattely south of the driveway noted in Condition 13 above (see annotation of Plan). Parking in this location poses a safety (.i.e. sight distance) hazard to those asing the driveway. It is the responsibility 6,rthe Applicant to assure 0 that its customers as well comply with this condition. 15. No parking whatsoever related to the Chnstrnas tree operation shall or-cur in the east.-side shoulder area of Danville Boulevard south of the subject property (see annotation of Plan). Parking in this area is a safety hazard. It is the responsibility of the Applicant to assure that its customers as well Comply with this condition. 16. Christmas tree sales shall close each day not later than 7:30 pm. 17. No lighting shall occur beyond that which already exists for the car sales operation as of the date of this letter, 1.8. No use of chain saws,generators or other excessive noise sources (e.g. amplified music) and no flocking or unsafe conditions shall occur at the site. 19. Chain link fencing shall be provided around the tree storage and sales areas as shown in the Plan. This fencing shall be covered with opaque white plastic sheeting on the creek side and north side of the fenced area as also shown in the Plan. No covering shall-11 be provided at other- portions of the fencing. 20. The Santa Claus display figure shall be placed at ground level and shall be located as shown in the Plan. This location is about 5 feet further back than shown in the Applicant's submitted 4-22-02 site plan,inorder to avoid obstructing the back-out area for parking stall number S. An onainal condition of AIA's November 26, 200'' reco=endation for approval of the proposed land use permit amendment had been that a mi=' of six on-site parking spaces be provided which meet the County's standards for stall and back-out dimensions for 90 degree parking. Through the process of examining scale plans and visiting the site, we are aware that 'Lie plan now proposed would not meet this condition with respect to stall and back out depth. During our site Visit, we tested the ability to park,and maneuver in each of the parking spaces identified in the Site Plan. We found that it was possible to maneuver to and.from each of the 5 identified customer parking spaces, albeit requiring greater care and more time than would be the case if the-spaces met the typical standard. The originally proposed sixth space cannot be used without backing all the way into or out of the Site and is now identif ed as the "Track Parking Only" space, The fact that the on-site customer parking spaces are unusually wide is of some benefit to the ability to maneuver into and out of them. However, there remains some uncertainty as to whether the atypical parking layout may slow on-site traffic movements sufficiently to cause congestion at the Site entry or on Danville Boulevard, This is an important reason for having a one-time "trial ran"for this use before considering broader approvals. Reuben Hernandez Community Development Department August 2,2002 Fags 4 The AIA has devoted an appreciable amount of time and effort to exainining this issue and devising these conditions wit Mr. Bridges so as to maximize the likelihood that a Christmas tree sales use of the Site can operate without undue congestion, safety or nuisance impacts to nearby properties or Danville Boulevard. &. Bridges has committed to fully observe these conditions. We view the use during the 2002 holiday season as a trial run to determine if the Christmas tree sales use does, in fact, operate in this way and whether clearly defined conditions are, in fact, fully observed. The AIA hopes that,during this trial run,these conditions are met and that the Christmas tree sales use is a success. Yours very truly, M A ��� Michael A. Gibson President Enclosures(?} (Site plan& Site Plan Enlargement} cc: Dale Bridges coy e-mail} Sarah Hawkins, Sup,Gerber's office ( } Karl 7`;iyati ( � Dan Smith ; } A A,Board&Planning Committer s` ) _.........._....................................... ......... .. ................................................ ...................... ..... ........... ....... ............ ............................... __._ ......... .......... ......_. . _ __ __ __ _ __ Ct ua f i Ai? i Cox v Jill y. ul a� t F a fa i 1. ( / �' ; gyp„ '3�, ti "tl• :st � D Ail�f r"¢' to xz�sess aeirru jjzari ai'mIa ur,*rift 'a ton. 1� A r t 1 F n Q; .. . �vay 4 �l 107 .OP APPEAL LETTER Exhibit A t 3Lahi Offices Of TELEPHONE(925)837-3355 �r toll b Mff ' `ct li BRIAN D.THIESSEN FAX(925;837-3352 3201 DANVILLE BOUL EVARIt S(_7rTE 235 ALAMO,CALIFORI ZIA 94547 OF COUNSEL GERALD W.FILICE BILI IJC A.ROMERO 23 September 2002 PAXALBGAL Dennis Barry, Director Community Development Department Contra Costa County 651 Pine St - 5" Floor Martinez, California 94553-00755 re: Dana use permit 012131 -- SRVRPC 18 September Appeal from SRVRPC to Beard of Supervisors Dear Dennis Please consider this as the request to appeal to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors the split decision of the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Cormi5sion on Item 5 on its 18 September 2002 agenda on this item. As you know,: the decision there was a 3-2 decision denying the appeal after a Motion to approve the appeal failed on a 2-3 vote. We believe the minority of the Commission understood in recen-c times Dale Bridges has operated his approved auto lot with no complaints from anyone and he was asking fob this one year permit to show he could operate the Christmas Tree lot under the 20 conditions recommended by the Alamo Improvement Association. He would like to be able to do that this year. Since the ordering of holiday trees is upon: us, we would appreciate this being scheduled as soon as possible. Enclosed .is our check. # 2439 for $:-25. 00 to cover the appeal fee. Thank you .for your attention to this matter. - Begaras tBDT:n /�/Brian D. Thiessen ��l enc: as indicatd cc: Dale Bridges Peter Ostrosky IA538''SRVRPC,SRV2BdAp.21S EXHIBIT A � hiit Chorol gical List of events for County File #LP012131 • September 18, 2002, the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission held a public hearing on the application and upheld the Zoning Administrators decision to deny the request. • August 19, 2002, an appeal of the Zoning Administrator's decision to deny the request was submitted to the Community Development Department. • August 12, 2002, A public hearing for County File #LP012131 was held in front of the County Zoning Administrator. The applicant's request to modify condition of approval #10 was denied by the Zoning Administrator. • November-December 2001, the sale of Christmas trees occurred on-site without proper permits. A notice to comply dated November 29, 2001, was sent to the owner informing them that the sale of trees was not allowed and that the activity should cease immediately. • November 1, 2001, an application (File #LP012131) to amend condition #10 of County File was submitted to the Community Development Department. The applicant (Dale Bridges) requested an amendment to condition #10 of County File #LP952061 that would allow the sale of Christmas trees on lot. • January 16, 2001, in a closed hearing the County Board of Supervisors determined that the applicant complied with all conditions of approval and that there was no cause to revoke the permit. • October 24, 2000, in a public hearing the Board of Supervisors denied the applicants appeal and upheld the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission's decision to deny modifications to Condition of Approval #10 of County File #LP952061 to allow the outdoor sale of Christmas trees. • October 24, 2000, the Board of Supervisors declared its intent to reject the revocation of the Land Use Permit if Mr. Bridges complied with all of the conditions by December 31, 2000. • April 18, 2000, the County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to determine whether cause exists to revoke the permit EXHIBIT B approved under County File #LP952061 for failure to comply with Conditions of Approval #1, #13, #16F and #30. • April 17, 2000, the applicant filed an application with the County to amend condition #10 of County File #LP952061. The condition prohibited the sale of Christmas trees without a new land use permit application. • November-December 1999, the sale of Christmas trees occurred on-site without proper permits. • May 19, 1999, the San Ramon Valley Planning Commission approved a land use permit to permanently establish a used car dealership at the subject property with conditions (attached). EXHIBIT B ............................... ................................................................................................................................................................................................... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... ......... . ........ ......... ......... . ........ ............ ........ _ ......_............ ...... ............ ... ... . ..... ........... ........ ... ......... . _ _ __ _ _ ............... PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE Edam© Chiropractic Clinic Family Chiropractic Care Miassage Thaxapy Nutriddh �'t7y5it3th�rapeUtlC5 DANIELS, S�etE7M, i .0 . Sports M.edicir,e FAX TRANSMITAL Daniel S. Smith* D.C. TO: t, J`A 4'64)OM La-`Z' DATE: � �3 FAX # 3 l of pgs (including cover page) COMM NTS, a t i .32`0 Danville Blvd.m Alamo,CA 94507 • Te((923)831.0766* Fax,9251831-0996 * Email,alamo.chirogworlrinet.att.net i&Ib/VIdU2 08:. 7 1 PAGE. 02 October 9, 2002 Supervisor Donna Gerber 309 Diablo Road Danville, CA 94526 Re. Bridges Motors Christmas Tree Lot Application Dear Supervisor Gerber, , We, Karl and Joyce l4iyati;are the owners of 3206-3208-321 Q Danville Wvd, Alamo, CA., neighboring building to the north of W Bridges' used car lot, We urge the Contra Costa.County Supervisors to vote "no"to the selling of Christmas trees on this lot. As residents of Alamo for 19 years and as members of AIA,we strongly oppose the usage of the used car lot for Christrn�, trer. sales for the following reasons. close proximity of neighbor, Dr. Daniel Smith, Chiropractic Clinic;access for patients to, adequate parkingfor appointments;and traffic safety to the adjacent property. The environmental impact in this area would create an unsatisfactory business environment and frustrate lots of people during a busy Christmas Season. ' Y, Karl and Joyce Niyati 75 Tracy Court Alamo, CA'94567 REDUCED SCALE MAP "14 F og- o 0 !r ��J1 d •�b i;� lf} dr 4 a9 +gy ivy ' t � •ty4�' � t%t .a, m o tiU©` 0 Iz s� OW Q� :I::, ,:, �:��,::�::�,;:,::,��:��,�:" ,:�,,I�-��,I I I -1,I I ,:::_: :�� ,:�,�:� -:��: :�:, : , I I��� I �:::: �,::���::::� ,�����!�,!�������;,,::�!�!!�:����������!�!:��!�.,�!�!���!!i!�!:: 11: , � ,, ,, , ,�� ,,,, ,.'.. x,�::x�,�::��:::::, : - , ,�� ��������:i����::!�::�l:i�:���ii����i!��!�����: �, I'll, :,:::�,:��i�:��,� �::, - , , : I , � �!��—�I�!�� ': 11- I I ,��: ,,�-��,, ��::::Illllllll � .... - ,� , � -� -I� I 11 "I'll I.", I". � - ,,,,,, ,­ � ,� I:�i, : ...��,�::�::�:�,T T ,�:�:,���:::�:�:���:: � , ���::I : , I I �� ��� %,��� I -,,"�� I 111- :: ,, - — , �:�� -1, ,: I I I � I 11 ,��"I'll,��'ll,���""::,::���,::��:��:,�x�:����:��]:����:���::�:���:�:�:���:���:�x���::�:::���:����,�I'l-41,I I� ] � , , I I I'll I I��- 'I,�11.11-- I"".",�.1, � IT:- - � �:,'' -�, I � I'll— , � , — 1, �- - , : : � : ��:�::::::, -,:: ,��,�����,,�������,,��:������ ,���!�������,,�::-- :: - : I N—I-�I I--'1I-,11l—1--,-.l I—:!���::��.���.,��.���:!I,'l,�l:�:—���:����l��,:,��:����1:�I1�:�—������1���1�:�.,,1l,,'!1l!'�:1:!�1�',���i��,::��:����:':,"�-:�"�:�:�,�:_,�,��,�,::��,:I:��!�:.:��:",�:,�I:":�:,:�:��������������::':X�:'��I:�—'��l�::����::�����;::i:::������:�:,:����:�:::��:�:�::����������:��i:��::���:�,"I]:��::I::'�::,-,���:�::-:���:�::����:��1��:.���1�:-:�-:,:�:::����:�:-:::�I:::�:I::����:�,�T� 1,�]�—:,',—��-1:1�:,_���l:",,,o,�,,,:_,:�':,­,'OTIF��—, —,�;�,."_" "�I�—:���'.,—.'I.",��7����:—.'I—."'"l'l,",:.,��CAT�:,'I":,,��i���".,::,",,,:,—',,',,,�—�,��,,ION ����:�:�::��­::��;�:,:��,, �,,.-:...T:!::��::1i��,1—"��-4:—I�-"—I-,I1,� ,,-�—:"��.�—:—'',:,','''�����!�,::,,::�:�,:�",�,,��',x:'�,,,��——����;��.I.�'—4I",",1I1-:"'�,1',,—1:'::I",1,�I:��-��'-�'—�:�'�.II1".:,:"-",1�-I�,1:I 1:-,.:���,,:::��:�-I:::.,:,-:.�:-.�"':_—�"",:""'-�::I-,':'�:",�,'"-:-�,-�:,�':,�,�����-:��:"::::�-�:'—�,::�,�—,,--������-��:�:I�:'�,,—�:,�,"X�,,::',�I-�-�,����,—'I:,:,�-,:,�—':��:��:!,:��—�,,��,�:�,:T�:::— "I' �1,I: 'l1.- _� " �� —. ." — ,� : —:�,—— , — , — �:11������:�:�����:������!i����:�����::����� ,:: : —1..._.::� I I''I�:������,,��������,�::,��:�����:'I , :�, �— — "'-k I , , 1—� ��. —:�:—, � � ,::,:�_ ::X, , ��', 11 '''' , , , � ��::,: ,:::Z::, I I I'��::��:�������������:����������:�:�����������������,::::�,::"I �'':: , — 1 , ;�x�M—"',Y, "::�::,���:����:�:�:�:��:��::�:�:::�::�,�����,:, ::�_::,: -: -- — , ''Ill, I'll , :::�x�,�—_:'_: :.:, , —:. ,�� ��,:'X::,�::1'111'14'1 - , I I I" , :: : ,. ,::"�' ':::::::�:���:��������� :�i��, ::�:�:��, ::�:�::�:�, — � �1— :--- � 1 .1,11, -----� "I'�,:�:������������:���:�:!����!��:�������������������!�!!���:�::::'"'�,�:,:"",� ' ',: "'',� ::— — --�, �.- 1, — , 'zl , :�:::�,:::::��� "I'�� ll''� ,�,��� l',����" , � ��: "� ll"���,,��� � � 1,1��1,11,��I I'll -- � �ll :�::, — � I , -— : � —� ,:::, . : — ,�': ,,T�': ' ': ::'',:�,�::�:���:�:��,�":::,:::,��:::�:�::�:��:�::�,�:���::,::::�:��:���:�����:������::��:::,���::����:���:�,�:�...:—' '.__­— —�T'Ill — �,� ...,�� ,:,:� : � — — I — — � 11 , , T'l I'll, I'll, . ...., ���:�:: , —: ::�::� , —_ .1 -11 ,: ... ,��. � , I 11,11 11 — —1.1 11 —, I — 1-11-1-1 ll—,�:�, � .,:_�': �::: :'I 'I', — , I'— "",����""":,��:�::::�,::::,:: ::�:�::::� :,�:.�,,�::�:�:: ,�:,���.: --111�— �.. : —, ��::�:,.:'':''�����]�:''�:�::�,�:��:�: I — — :�:::��!:��:���.�X:,: "I'll','—,: -�::�::��:,:��:��:��,,�': ��;����:: — , , I �:-- ''I", — � , ��.�', — "I I — 1'1,�, �j��:�,��:��:�,:—:—:� "I''I 'l— ,: � — I I I , "��, J:::�,�;�:�:� ::::,�� I � — ,:-:� ::: :_­___� , , 1-11111-1 1,1 11 :: ::,,-::,: ,: � 1 . I , 141''ll, ��;�:�;::�:��:���i:j�l 111.111,11 , ���:,�����;:�:��— —1 : , :1�1��,,—�:::::��:�:��::,:I,:����-��—�:,,��::,�—,,,I�:,1,�—::—����1 1—�::1,1—;��l::�1�l"l�:-::'�—�y�":�":�:''—,,1'1,—_:,1:''%:1l—l:::,::���::�.�_1—,,%:1�,:":—�:,,�:���—:::��:,":—,:"::—::I":�:�"::�I�:�:T�:"':':��I,:�':��l�,,�:�,'::I:��'�:�:�,�::�::�::�:,,�::�,:::�:,::::;:�:_:��:�:��,�:��,,.::�.:���:.:��::.,::::�����:.�.:,:,'����:,':",�:��:,���:',:'�.',::.:��'���.:—::.::�"���i�:.�:..:,:.���.:::.:��.�::.�.::.::�'��.��.'.:�.:,�."�.��.�::.:::.��:.:.:::.�,���:�,�,,I,�,,:,,'_:—:�,:-,:�:—l::,��l��:��',:;'�_I�,":l,I"I�—,I::��:�l�:������l:�—:::::!�::�,::�:�:�:���:��������,�::�::::��:������������t �::.......x �: (x::,—,:��:��I�—:::��1�1:���T�—�,��,:���:���:�����:����:::�i��i�����:�:��:��X��:�:�����:?:�:������:�i'�:�!':�,������,�;����::��,:��:�:����:�,��::������ii�I����-:�������T����'��:'"�II1�—'I�l'1�l—�l--�"����"--1�—,.II1"I.—''11'',,11l:'I I,l,-1,T-1��:1.�-:_—',—'—_,����:!::::�,::x—:,I�—,:":,�—:--�'�T.'—�_l.''.,.:l-'':,.",',I:I"—��'',:.�—lI�—1"����:��i��i�,;��:�1��;��—��������i��,���,���;��,:��::���;���:�,�:�;,�����::�����,�,�,:�::��:��::��;�����:,�I::::�:i1I1,�,"—III1.',I41--11::l1—"l::1,, ,—:'':,—,:I,,:��—�:',:1:—,, ::4 1,",11—,, 197 010 007 197 010 019 197 010 025 t\'iyati Gary&Marilyn Meadors Del Prado Co Lic Tracy Ct 113 Muir Ln � � 3200 Danville Blvd .- mo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 Alar_io, CA 94507 197 010 027 197 010 028 197 310 001 M b Foster Lic Mary Alice Carelli&Mark&Marcia K Joseph Edward Adolph PO Box 1058 1344 Fountain Springs Cir 300 Alamo Sq Alamo,CA 94507 Danville,CA 94526 Alamo, CA 94507 197 310 002 197 310 003 197 310 004 Susan Peyton Louis &Jeannette Hanson Debra Miller&Elfrieda Miller 302 Alamo Square Dr 33 Tam Oshianter Rd 306 Alamo Square Dr Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 r 197 310 005 197 310 005 197 310 007 Constance Johnson&Frank&Laure Ju Marjorie Britian Lurmann Marion Eymanr. 346 Seatrail Dr W 310 Alamo Square Dr rib 131 Eureka St#130 Sunset Beach, NC 28458 Alamo,CA 94507 Grass Valley,CA 95945 197 310 008 197 310 009 197 310 010 E Patricia.Barney James Jeha Julie Ansi Manley 314 Alamo Square Dr 315 Alamo Sq 318 Alamo Sq Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo, CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 197310011 197310012 197310013 Joh.&VVeronica Radergard Ciat+d Lee&Irene Mcgill 320 Alamo Square Dr 322 Alamo Sq 324 Alamo square Dr Alamo,CA. 94507 Alamo, CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 197310014 1973100115 197310016 Harry&Raija Hutton � G M&.sally Cople �/ Ronald Franklins 3159 L,unada Ln PO Box 427 330 Alamo Sq#16 Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA-94507 -Alamo,CA 94537 197310017 197310018 197310019 Barbara Hahn Cherie Deemer Donald&Neysa Defremery 332 Alamo Sq 334 Alamo Square Dr#18 336 Alamo square Dr Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo;CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 197 310 027 197 310 028 197 310 029 :aures Saylor&.Shirley Saylor Debra Holmes-Higgin Adams Margie 1 2001 325 Alamo Sq 323 Alamo Sq 321 Alamo Sq Alamo, CA 94507 Alamo, CA 94507 Alamo, CA 94507 310 030 197 310 031 197 310 032 Richard&Joan Scott Darlene Jaynes Patricia Pinnella&Carrie Pinnella PO Box 424 72645 Hedgehog St 315 Alamo Square Dr#32 Danville, CA 94526 Palm Desert,CA 92260 Alamo, CA 94507 197 310 E34 197 310 035 197 310 036 Duayna Ford Pucci Jeanne Eldridge Constance Madsen Diermsse 102 Alamo Square Dr 104 Alamo Square Dr 106 Alamo Square Dr Ala-no, CA 94507 Alamo, CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 197 410 001 197 410 002 197 410 003 Francisco Carballo Max Chandler Jr. Brenda Brill 1470 Danville Blvd#1 '� 1470 Danville Blvd#2 1470 Danville Blvd#3 Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 197410004 197410005 197410013 Andrew Ward Brian Brereton Hale Wai Investors 1470 Danville Blvd 1470 Danville Blvd#5 1470Danville Blvd#13 Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 Alamo,CA 94507 198010013 198010016 198010019 Robert&Judith Kretz Robert&Judith Kretz / J B&Mardi Potts PO Box 580 PO Box 683 1981 N.Broadway#320 Danville, CA 94526 Danville,CA 94526 Walnut CreeX CA 94596 198010019 198010019 198010020 J B&Mardi Potts J B&Mardi Potts Robert&Judith Kretz . 19811'4 Broadway#320 1981 N Broadway#320 PO Box 580 -1.1 Walnut Creel,CA 94596 Walnut Creed.,CA 94596 .Danville, CA 94526 198 010 020 198 061 008 198 061 009 Robert&Judith Kretz Mission Trail Oil Company David&Lena Yang � PO Box 580 4250 Williams Rd 1904 Scarborough Ct Danville,CA 94526 San.Jose,CA 95129 Modesto, C.A. 95355 198 061 009 198 061 016 David&Lena Yang Renato Trust Bozzone 1904 Scarborough Ct 2813 Doidge Ave Modesto,CA 95355 Pinole,CA 94564 Beth Batchelor 3012 Sandstone Rd. Alamo, Ca. 94507 -Mother Mary Ann Wright Roger Smith Larry rebel 1112 26' St. 85 High Eagle Rd. 601 Sycamore galley Rd. Oakland, Ca. 94607 Alamo, Ca. 94507 Danville, Ca. 94526 Daniel Smith Brian D. Thiessen Dale Bridges 1640 Cervato Cir 3201 Danville Blvd. Suite 29S" 321.2 Danville Blvd. z Alamo, Ca. 94507 Alamo, Ca. 94507 Alamo, Ca. 94507 Peter Ostrosky Alamo Improvement Assoc. San Ramon'Valley Eire 17 Sugarloaf TerraceP.O. Box 271 r Protection District " Alamo, Ca. 94507 Alamo, Ca 94507 1500 Bollinger Canyon Rd. San Ramon, Ca. 94583 @0915 ,I sej sip e j ssajppV 3,AUBAV k� Lo Boman Tlusse :3012- eth Bate bale B Bx es 3201 D le Blvd.. Suite 295 andstore R.d. 3212 All-Blvd AI Ca. 94507 amo Ca. 94507 o Ca. 94507 Rieitara Leroy Green 40 Lawton ot. San Ramon Ca. 94583 :Paton Bainel 2901 Danville Blvd. Alamo Ca. 94547