HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10212003 - C68 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
' Contra
FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP Costa
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR „.{ xH County
DATE: October 21, 2003
SUBJECT: Recommendation of the County Planning Commission to Allow Proposed
Encroachments within Two Deed-Restricted Areas for a Proposed Residence on
Lot 5 of Subdivision 7023, Clayton Valley Farms, in the Clayton/Morgan Territory
area(County Pile#DP877023)(Vincent Heitzmann--Applicant&Owner)(Sup.Dist.
111)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
RECOMMENDATION
1. Authorize grading within a portion of the site whose development rights were
conveyed to the County relative to a possible earthquake fault.
2. Authorize construction of a waterline and domestic water well within a portion of
an adjoining property whose development rights were conveyed to the County to
serve the proposed residence.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE (S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON Odt0ber Z1, 2( APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENTNOM 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: Bob Drake [(925)335-1214] ATTESTED October 21, 2003
cc: Community Development Dept. ,JOHN SWEETEN, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF
Vincent Heitzmann SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Health Services Dept., Env. Health Div., Sherman Quinlan y
Public Works Dept., Real Property Div. 1A ,E
B, ,�lt�r iA. s-°' "$ ,DEPUTY
October 21, 2003
Board of Supervisors
File#SD877023
Page 2
3. Determine that the 1989 Negative Declaration determination that was adopted for
the Subdivision 7023 project for purposes of satisfying the current project's
requirement to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act.
4. Adapt Resolution #25-2003 of the County Planning Commission as the basis for
this action.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
BACKGROUND
In 1988-89,the County approved the Clayton Valley Farms subdivision (SUB 7023)that allowed the
subdivision of 589-acres into 10 lots. Nine of the ten parcels were created in the 5 --- 10 acre size
range. The tenth lot is much larger and allowed for a horse breeding operation for the northwestern
portion of the subdivision.
In addition to the ten parcels, the project also provided for a large Remainder property; the County
required that the development rights of a major portion of that Remainder area be grant deeded to the
County, in a so-called "scenic easement."
Also, due to concern with a potential earthquake fault crossing the property,at the recommendation of
the County Geologist, the County required that a separate deed restriction be placed on the property
whose purpose was to bar development from the area of the site that may be subject to fault rupture,
and other geologic hazards. In addition, the subdivision permit requires that a 50-foot structure
setback be observed from the edge of the seismic fault deed-restricted areas.
To satisfy the scenic easement and seismic fault deed restriction requirements, the subdivision
developer filed two grant deeds of development rights (DDDR). It should be noted that portions of
these grant deeds of development right instruments cover geographic areas that overlap.
This item was initially scheduled for consideration by the Board on October 14, 2003. However, the
Board elected' to continue the item to October 21, 2003 so that the matter could be further studied.
Sherman Quinlan of the Health Services Department has indicated that he has no objection to the
proposed offsite well.
PROPOSED RESIDENCE
Lot 5 of the Clayton Valley Farms is located at the eastern terminus of Meadow View Lane. It is one
of the last lots within the subdivision to develop. The site is oriented in a north-south alignment with a
Swale at either end. The middle portion of the site is an elevated nose ridge. The applicant is
proposing to construct a three-story residence whose overall height will not exceed 35 feet on the
nose ridge portion of the site. The proposed improvements will avoid removal or encroachment to
October 21, 2003
Board of Supervisors
(rile#SD877023
Page 3
nearby trees,' and complies with zoning district design standards. The Clayton Valley Farms
homeowners association has approved the residential design. The applicant has also designed the
project to comply with the requirements of the Consolidated Fire Protection District.
A portion of the above described seismic hazard DDDR lies on the eastern side of the site. The site
abuts the Remainder property, including the `scenic easement" portion of that remainder property.
The applicant has drilled for a water well on the adjoining property(approximately 50 feet from Lot 5),
and is proposing to extend a water line to connect his residence with that well. The Health Services
Department has indicated that the proposed offsite well is conditionally acceptable to that Department.
However, in order for the applicant to qualify for a building permit for the proposed residence, he must
obtain three discretionary approvals from the County:
• To allow grading within a portion of the site whose development rights were granted to the
County(seismic hazard GDDR);
• To allow construction of a associated waterline and well within a scenic easement DDDR,and
within the seismic hazard DDDR; and
• To allow construction of a residence tangent to a seismic hazard DDDR(i.e.,within the 50-foot
setback area required by the subdivision permit.
On September 9, 2003,the County Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the project.
Staff had advised that based on geotechnical investigation reviews, including a peer review by the
County Geologist, staff saw no geotechnical reason to prevent the applicant from building in the
proposed location. Staff also recommended that the applicant be allowed to develop the offsite water
line and well site within the scenic easement insofar as the view impacts of such development would
be negligible.
No one appeared in opposition to the proposed residence.
After taping testimony,the Planning Commission voted unanimously to modify the original subdivision
permit condition of approval to allow development adjacent to the seismic hazard DDDR. The
Commission also voted to recommend that the Board of Supervisors allow the proposed grading and
waterline and well within the two deed restricted areas. However, as a condition, the Commission
required that the applicant restrict the exterior light reflectance of the residence;to which the applicant
had agreed.
No appeal of the County Planning Commission action was timely filed.
GACurrent Planning\carr-plan\Board\Board Orders\sd877023-b.bo.doc
RD\
I Not including the site of the proposed water well,which already has been developed.
L
f
i
RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION, COUNTY OF
CONTRA COSTA,STATE OF CALIFORNIA CONCERNING A PROPOSAL TO
MODIFY A STRUCTURE SETBACK REQUIREMENT AND TO ALLOW
ENCROACHMENT WITHIN TWO HEED RESTRICTED AREAS PERTAINING
TO SITING OF A RESIDENCE ON LOT 5 OF SUBDIVISION 7023 (Clayton
Valley F-arms),County File#SD877023 (Vincent Heitzmann-Applicant & Owner)
On August 9, 1988,the County Planning Commission approved vesting tentative
map Subdivision 7023 (Clayton Valley Farms)which approved a subdivision involving a
commercial horse breeding facility and ten(10)rural residential parcels, said approval
was conditioned on the applicant conveying two deed instruments to dedicate
development rights to the County covering portions of the 579-acre site for purposes of
retention of open space and for protection from hazards associated with an identified
potential earthquake fault crossing the subdivision; said subdivision also required that
development observe a setback from the deed-restricted area established to guard against
seismic hazards,per the recommendation of the County Geologist;in approving this
project, the County Planning Commission also adopted a Negative Declaration
determination for purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act,
The Board of Supervisors subsequently approved the final map for said
subdivision, and it was subsequently recorded in 1989.
In 1995,the County approved a lot litre adjustment that pernrnlitted the
reconfiguration of several of the rural residential lots,including Lot 5.
More recently, the owner of Lot 5,Vincent Heitzmann, applied to the County to
modify the structure setback restriction, and to allow encroachment within both the
scenic easement and fault hazard deed-restricted areas for a proposed residence and
supporting structures on Lot 5 and adjoining property.
After notice of the project was lawfully given, on September 9,2003,the County
Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposal.
All present were afforded an opportunity to testify on the project.
The Planning Commission having reviewed and considered all evidence and
testimony on this matter,
RESOL' 'TD, that the County Planning Commission finds that the Negative
Declaration determination that was adopted for the 1988 approval of the tentative map
remains valid for the current proposal.
Resolution No.25-2003
Further,the Commission finds that the documentation provided by the applicant
and County staff that the proposed siting of the residence will not result in a significant
safety hazard from potential seismic activity.
Further,the proposed placement of a domestic well and well line to connect to the
residence on the adjoining property will not result in any significant adverse impacts
including visual impacts.
Therefore,the County Planning Commission approves modification to the
structure setback language to allow for placement of structures within 50 feet of the fault
zone deed-restricted area where acceptable documentation is presented to the County
Geologist.
Further,the County Planning Commission recommends that the Board of
Supervisors allow the requested residential improvement encroachments pertaining to
development of Lot 5 within the(1)seismic fault hazard deed-restricted area, and(2)the
scenic easement area on the adjoining property.
The decision of the County Planning Commission was given by motion of the
County Planning Commission on September 9,2003 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Terrell, Hanecak, Clark,Mehlman,Wong, and Battaglia.
NOES: Commissioners—None.
ABSENT: Commissioners—Gaddis.
ABSTAIN: Commissioners—None.
LEONARD BATTAGLI A.
Chairman, County Planning Commission
County of Contra Costa, State of California
I,Dennis M. Barry, Secretary of the County Planning Commission certify that the
foregoing was duly called and approved on September 9,2003.
ATTEST:
Dennis M.Barry, AICP,
Secretary of the County Planning Commission,
County of Contra Costa, State of California
G:\Current Planning\curr-plan\Resolutions\Heitzmann.res.doe
RD\
2