Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 11152005 - D7 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contr FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP - a COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR Costa c' ° Count DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2005 It r SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN THAT CLARIFIES THE 25-FOOT MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENT (COUNTY FILE NO. SP05- 0001) (SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT III) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. RECOMMENDATIONS A. OPEN the public hearing, ACCEPT any written or oral public testimony related to the proposed amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan (County File # SP05-0001), and CLOSE the public hearing. B. FIND the Negative Declaration prepared for this project to be adequate for the purpose of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and ADOPT the Negative Declaration. C. ACCEPT the recommendation of the County Planning Commission as contained in Resolution No. 29-2005. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE rJ 5� RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES 0 ACTION OF BOARD ON — �D APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OT ER CLOSID the hearing; no public cadent; VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND V 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:John Oborne,(925)335-1207 ATTESTED dl �/5'b5 JOHN SWEETEN,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Orig: Community Development Department SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cc: County Counsel County Administrator's Office Clerk of the Board BY S. Meyers, City of Walnut Creek DEPUTY A.Carreon,City of Walnut Creek r November 15, 2005 County File#SP05-0001 Board of Supervisors Page 2 D. ACCEPT the recommendation and findings as contained in Resolution No. 3361 from the City of Walnut Creek Planning Commission. E. FIND that the proposed amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan is consistent with the overall goals and objectives of both the North Gate Specific Plan and the Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005—2020. F. ADOPT the amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan (County File # SP05-0001) as the third amendment to the Specific Plan to clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height as contained in Exhibit A of Board Resolution No. 2005/171. G. ADOPT Board Resolution No. 2005-701 as the basis for the Board's decision. H. DIRECT staff to post a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. II. FISCAL IMPACT The County determined there is a need to clarify the North Gate Specific Plan as it relates to the 25-foot maximum residential building height as stated in the Specific Plan. The staff costs for this amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan (County File # SP05-0001) are covered by the Department's revenue received from the issuance of building permits which is used for maintaining and updating land use regulations. III. BACKGROUND/ REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The North Gate Specific Plan, adopted in June 1991, was the result of a joint planning effort between the County and the City of Walnut Creek to provide additional guidance and detail for the 507 acre North Gate area that is comprised of unincorporated and incorporated lands. The Specific Plan includes goals and policies that are designed to retain and support the semi-rural, recreational, and agricultural uses of the area. To this end, one of the regulations of the Specific Plan is to limit residential building height of most of the new homes to 25-feet. This includes all of the homes that are constructed in the Specific Plan area except for those that front North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road, where the height limit is 20-feet. This amendment does not affect the 20-foot height limit, but only the 25-foot height limit. Recently the County received comments from some residents in the North Gate area that some of the homes that are being constructed exceed the maximum allowable residential building height of 25-feet as it is stated in the North Gate Specific Plan. While the Specific Plan does indeed limit the height of homes to 25 feet, it also references compliance with the "City's 25-foot height limit" which allows for up to 29 feet when the pitch of the roof is more than 3:12. The purpose of this text amendment is to include the City of Walnut Creek's expanded definition in the Specific Plan. For a more detailed explanation refer to the Planning Commission staff report dated July 12, 2005. November 15, 2005 County File#SP05-0001 Board of Supervisors Page 3 County Planning Commission Hearing on July 12, 2005 The County Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 12, 2005 during which one speaker appeared to comment on the proposed North Gate Specific Plan amendment (County File #SP05-0001). The speaker expressed concern that the homes that were under construction near her were too big and were not in the spirit of the Specific Plan, which is to maintain asemi-rural character. After taking testimony the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the proposed amendment by the County Board of Supervisors. City of Walnut Creek Planning Commission Hearing on August 25, 2005 As established under the North Gate Specific Plan, approval of any requested amendments must be reviewed and approved by both the Walnut Creek City Council and the Board of Supervisors. On August 25, 2005, the Walnut Creek City Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the proposed amendment. The Walnut Creek City Planning Commission has recommended to the Walnut Creek City Council an approval of an amendment to clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height as defined by the City of Walnut Creek Municipal Code. This recommendation is more fully described under Attachment # 3 to this report, Walnut Creek City Planning Commission Resolution No. 3361. Should the Board adopt the Specific Plan Amendment, the Walnut Creek City Council will then take up the matter and consider the recommendation of their City Planning Commission. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT#1: DRAFT BOARD RESOLUTION NO. 2005/701 . ATTACHMENT#2: COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 29-2005 ATTACHMENT#3: WALNUT CREEK PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 3361 ATTACHMENT#4: STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ATTACHMENT#5: CEQA: NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND INITIAL STUDY ATTACHMENT#6: PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION G:\Current Planning\curr-plan\Staff Reports\SP05-0001.80-1.jvo.doc THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA Adopted this Order on Tuesda37,November 15,2005,by the following vote: AYES: Gioia,Piepho,DeSaulnier,Glover and Uilkema NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION NO.2005/701 SUBJECT: In the Matter of the Third Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan } That clarifies the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirement ) As it is stated in the Specific Plan ) County File: SP#05-0001 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES that: There is filed with this Board and its Clerk a copy of Resolution No.29-2005 adopted by the County Planning Commission which recommends approval of the Third Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that clarifies the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirement as it is stated in the Specific Plan(County File No. SP05-0001) On Tuesday,November 15,2005,the Board held a public hearing on said Third Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan,as discussed in County Planning Commission,Resolution No.29- 2005. Notice of said hearing was duly given in the manner required by lave. The Board, at said hearing,called for testimony of all persons interested in this matter. On Tuesday,November 15,2005,the Board determined the Negative Declaration and Initial Study prepared for the Third Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan (CountFile. SP#05 - 0001) 0001)are adequate for purposes of compliance with the California EnvironmentalQ �ualit y Act. On Tuesday, November 15, 2005, the Board APPROVED the Third Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan(County File:SP#05-0001)'and directed text changes to the Specific Plan as described In the attachment labeled as Exhibit "A"to this resolution. Contact:J.Oborne,CDD(925-335-1207) cc: Community Development Department CAO County Counsel City of Walnut Creel, C;:\C;urrent Planning\curr-plan\Staff Reports\.SP05-000LBoard Resolution 200-5-701.dor RESOLUTION NO.2005/701 EXHIBIT"A" RESOLUTION NO.2005/701 (County File: SP#05-0001) Atpacre 9,North Gate Specific Plan,under the heading"Land Use Regulation".second paragraph, � second sentence, add an asterisk after the words"25 feet"so it now reads: New homes should be one or two stories,no higher than 25 feet.*; and At the bottom of page 9 add a footnote that reads: *In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of 25-feet residential building height,height may be increased by four feet if at least 750/'o of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:12 or greater. At page 10,North Gate Specific Plan,under the heading"Land Use Regulation"fourth paragraph, second sentence,add an asterisks after the words"the City's 25 foot height limit",so it now reads: All new construction will have to comply with the City's 25-foot height limit*, and any requests to remove trees will be subject to the provisions of the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance.;and At the bottom of page 10 add a footnote that reads: *In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of 25-feet residential building height,height may be increased by four feet if at least 75°0 of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:1?or greater. At page 18,North Gate Specific Plan,under the heading"Height",first sentence.add an asterisk after the words"no higher than 2 5 feet.",so it now reads: The height limit for all residential structures shall be two stories,no higher than 25 feet.*;and At the bottom of page 18 add a footnote that reads: *In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of 25-feet residential building height,height maybe increased by four feet if at least 75%of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:12 or greater. RESOLUTION NO. 29=2005 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDATION ON AN AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN TO CLARIFY THE 25-FOOT MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AS IT IS STATED IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN (COUNTY FILE NO. SP05=0001) WHEREAS, the County of Contra Costa determined that there is a need to clarify the 25- foot maximum residential building height as stated in the North Gate Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, after notice was lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the County Planning Commission on July 12, 2005, whereat all persons interested might appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, the County Planning Commission received reports from staff and conducted a public hearing on Tuesday, July 12, 2005, on an amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan to clarify the 25-foot residential building height; and WHEREAS, on Tuesday, July 12, 2005, the County Planning Commission having fully reviewed, considered, and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and State and County CEQA guidelines, an initial study was prepared and a negative declaration was posted on June 6, 2005 for a public comment period that ended on June 26, 2005. No comments were received during the public comment period; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the County Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa recommends for adoption by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Contra Costa an amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan to clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirement as stated in the Specific Plan. The instructions by the County Planning Commission to prepare this Resolution were given by motion of the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, July 7, 2005, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners- Mehiman, Battaglia, Clark, Snyder, Terrell, Gaddis, Wong NOES: Commissioners - None ABSENT: Commissioners- None ABSTAIN: Commissioners- None BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Secretary of the County 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. Steven Mehiman, Chair of the County Planning Commission, County of Contra Costa, State of California ATTEST: Dennis M. Barry, Secretary County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa State of California GACurrent Planning\curr-p1anlStaff Reports\SP05-0001.CPC resolution29-2005.jvo.doc 1 C I T Y O F WALNUT CR K August 31, 2005 John Oborne Community Development Dept. Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, North Wing, 4th Floor Martinez,, CA 9455-3' On August 25, 2005 the Walnut Creek Planning Commission took the following action on the North Gate Specific Plan Amendment No. 2 and 3 F-1 APPROVED D AMENDED WITH CONDITIONS ❑ DENIED If the Planning Commission took final action on your application, Resolution No. 3361 setting forth the findings, action., and ballot of the Commission in regard to this item will be enclosed. For additional information regarding disposition of this application, please refer to the reverse side of this letter. Very truly yours., SANDRA MEYER, Secretary Walnut Creek Plannin(T Commission Enclosure cc: Dennis Barry. Contra Costa County Pat Roche. Contra Costa County Tim Joctuier David Bogstad Norm Dver. Lovim., and Campos ��c,si c�lii��•���;:Y�0 (). l�,c,r,i���,rtl� ��iain Wainui _.rcuk 015ur: U1"', l};l)C: lV1Nlt'.;I.\'JahlLli-Cl-C,l'1;.l:l.11 P1 II111'il 011 I('l It'tl 1](1171•, a e, NOTICE TO APPLICANT WALNUT CREEK PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION AND GENERAL INFORMATION REZONING, PREZONING, H-P-D PERMIT, P-D PERMIT If the Planning Commission approved your application for rezoning, prezo r*u*ng, H-P-D or P-D permits, it will automatically be referred to the City Council who must hold another public hearing before final action is taken. The City Council hearing will be scheduled after final Planning Commission action. The exact date varies, and may be verified by calling the Community Development Department., (9.2.5) 943-5834. If the Planning Commission denied your application, all proceedings are terminated unless you appeal to the City Council within ten days following the transmittal date of this notice. In the event the tenth day is a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday, the appeal period automatically extends to the end of the next working day. An appeal must be filed with the City Clerk. In the event of denial, no new application may be filed within one year. See Section 10-?.4.405 - ofthe Municipal Code for further details. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAPS Action by the Planninol.- Commission is final unless: (1) The subdivider files an appeal within 10 days of the decision. in which case the City Council must hold a hearing; or (2) Any interested person may file a complaint within ]0 days of the decision; or (3) The City Council may decide aw to review a Planning Commission decision within 10 days of receiving the report. USE PERMITS Action by the Plannin(T Commission on use permits is final unless there is an appeal filed with the City Clerk within 10 days of the date of transmittal of this notice. An appeal may be made by any City or� Cite landowner affected bN11 the decision. See Section 10-2.4-5401 et seq. of the Municipal Code for-complete information on appeals. In the absence of an appeal within the specified time. the decision of the Plamilm', Commission is final. WALi .JT CREEK PLANNING COMMISSrON RESOLUTION NO. 3361 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2 and 3 NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN Section 1. Findings. 1. On August 25, 2005, the Walnut Creek Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider Amendment No. 2 and 3 to the North Gate Specific Plan, pursuant to a request by the Contra Costa County Community Development Department. 2. The North Gate Specific Plan is a joint planning document which guides future development in the North gate area. Adopted in 199 1,the plan includes goals and policies for the area,land use and development regulations,and procedures for reviewing development applications. The major portion of the land area is in the County. Amendments to the Specific Plan are to be approved by both the Walnut Creek City Council and the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors. 3. This is the second and third amendment to the Specific Plan since adoption. The request includes 1) To allow"Limited Winemaking/Winery"as a conditionally permitted use whereas the Plan currently prohibits all land uses not specifically listed therein.;and 2)To clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirement as it is stated in the Plan. 4. Approval of this amendment would allow Limited Winemaking/Winery as a conditionally permitted land use and enable person with interest to establish a Limited Winemaking/Winery use to apply for a Conditional Use Permit through the Contra Costa County Community Development Department. 5. A Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance,prepared by County staff,was posted for this project on June 6, 2005. County staff concluded that the proposed text amendments would not result in any significant effect on the environment. 6. The North Gate Specific Plan allows private greenhouses,gardens and orchards;conditionally permits commercial greenhouses; commercial nurseries, and prohibits Limited Winemaking/Winery. 7. The Contra Costa County Planning .Commission held a public hearing on July 12, 2005 and recommended approval of both amendments to the Contra Costa Count}'Board of Supervisors. Per the City of Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County processing procedures,approval of any requested amendments must be reviewed and approved by the Cit),of Walnut Creek prior to action by the Contra Costa Count), Board of Supervisors. 8. The Walnut Creek Planning Commission supports amending the land use categories in the specific plan to allow "Limited Winemaking/Winery" as a conditionally permitted use. The Commission finds that Limited Winemaking/Winer}'uses could be conditioned to operate in a similar manner to be compatible with new and existing residential and agricultural development. 9. The Walnut Creek Planning Commission supports amending the North Gate Specific Plan to clarif-y the 2'-foot maximum residential building height requirement as defined by the City of Walnut Creel,: Municipal Code. Based on the evidence presented at the hearing on this item,and on investigations made bv this Commission and on its behalf, the Walnut Creek Planning Commission herebv resolves that: a. The Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with CEQA, State and City Guidelines. Walnut Creek Planning Cominission Page 2 North Gate Specific Plan Amend.No. 2 and 3 August 25, 2005 b. The health,safety,welfare,and general prosperity of the residents in the North Gate Specific Plan area will be served by the proposed change in the land use designations from prohibiting "Limited Winemaking/Winery"to conditionally permitting"Limited Winemaking/Winery." With proper conditions of approval, Limited Winemaking/Winery uses could operate in manner that is compatible with new and existing residential and agricultural development. Section.2. Decision. Based on the findings set forth above,the Walnut Creek Planning Commission hereby recommends to the Walnut Creek City Council that the North Gate Specific Plan be amended as follows: 1. Add "Limited Winemaking/Winery"to the list of Conditionally Permitted Uses. 2. Amend the text of the North Gate Specific Plan, as outlined in the staff report prepared by the Contra Costa County Community Development Department dated July 1.2), 2005, to clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirement for consistency with the City of Walnut Creek Municipal Code. Section 3. Effective Date. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. Amendment No 2: PASSED AND ADOPTED on August 25, 2005 by the Walnut Creek Planning Commission at a regular meeting thereof upon motion by Commissioner Larsen;seconded by Commissioner Moore. Ayes: Larsen, Moore, Kaplan, Silva Noes: None Absent: Jorgensen, Simmons Abstain: Pickett Amendment No. 3: PASSED AND ADOPTED on August 25, ?005 by the Walnut Creed: Planning Commission at a rebular meetinb thereof upon motion bv Commissioner Larsen;seconded bN1 Commissioner Kaplan. Ayes: Larsen, Kaplan, Moore, Silva Noes: None Absent: Jorgensen, Simmons Abstain: Pickett ow SECRETAR)' Walnut Creek Planning Commission H:\ABC3(Carreon)WorthGateSpecificPlanWGSPAmendment2n3_Aug2005WGSPAmend2and3PCResov I.DOC Agenda Item# L _ Community Development Department Contra Costa County CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAYJULY 12, 2 00 5 I. INTRODUCTION AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN TO CLARIFY THE 25- FOOT MAXII\41W RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AS IT IS STATED IN THE SPECIFIC PLAN. (County File: SPO.'A)-0001). This is a County initiated text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan to clarify the 25-feet maximum residential building height requirements. E. RECOMMENDATION Recommend to the Board of Supervisors the adoption of an amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan to clarify the 25-feet maximum residential building height requirement as stated in the North Gate Specific Plan, as follows: At page 9, North Gate Specific Plan, under the heading "Land Use Regulation" , second paragraph, second sentence, add an asterisk after the words " ,',2.5 feet" so it now reads: New homes should be one or two stories,no higher than 25 feet*., and; At the bottom of page 9 add a footnote that reads: *In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of 25-feet residential building height, height may be increased by four feet if at least 75°/0 of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:12 or greater. At page 10, North Gate Specific Plan, under the heading "Land Use Regulation" fourth paragraph, second sentence, add an asterisks after the words " the City"s ?� foot height Limit", so it now reads: All nein construction will have to complv with the C'tt7s 2)5-foot height Limit and any requests to remove-trees will be subject to the provisions of the CM,0 S Tree Preservation Ordinance., and; At the bottom of page 10 add a footnote that reads: *In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of ?5-feet residential building height. height ma�� beincreased bv four feet if at least 750/�� of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimump itch of 3:12 or greater. At pale 18. North Gate Specific Plan, under the heading "Height", first sentence, add an asterisks after the words "no higher than 2� feet.". so it now reads: S-2 The height limit for all residential structures shall be two stories, no higher than 25 feet*. , and; At the bottom of page 18 add a footnote that reads: *In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of 25-feet residential building height, height may be increased by four feet if at least 75% of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:12 or greater. III. BACKGROUND The North Gate Specific Plan (attached at the end of this report), which was adopted in 1991, is the result of a joint planning effort between the City of Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County. During this joint planning effort design guidelines WCTCdeveloped for the North Gate Specific Plan area (vicinity map attached as Figure 1.). The goals of these design guidelines are to maintain and enhance the existing semi-rural character of the North Gate Specific-Plan area as a transition from the suburban residential development to the north and west to the agricultural and open space lands to the south and east. One of the designguidelines, building which is the subject of this amendment, is residential height. In the Specific Plan area, the maximum residential building height requirements are split into two geographic areas. The first geographic areas are the lots that front North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road. Along these roads the height of a residence is limited to one story and 20-feet in height. The second geographic areas are all the remaining lots in the Specific Plan area that do not front North Gate Road or Castle Rock Road. Along these roads the height of a residence is limited to two stories and 2-5-feet in height. As written in the Specific Plan, the 2 0-feet residential building height limitation along North Gate and Castle Rock roads has no provision for a greater residential building height to accommodate for roof pitch, whereas the 25-feet height limitation does by means of a reference to the City's .2.,5-feet height limit, without actually stating it. The purpose of this text amendment is to clarify and include the City's definition of its 25- foot height limit in the Specific Plan. IV STAFF ANALYSIS As previously stated the proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan seeks to clarify the maximum residential building height requirements for most of the lots in the Specific Plan area. The proposed amendment does not apply to lots fronting North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road. There are three references in the North Gate Specific Plan that relate to maximum residential building height for residences that are not frontinD North Gate or Castle Rock roads. The first reference is under Land Use Recrulatioris, page 9, where it states, "Nev, homes should be one or two stories no higher than ?.5*)-feet.'" The second reference is under Development Regulations on pale 1 8, where it.states "The height limit for all new S-3 residential structures shall be two stories, no higher than 25-feet. It is the third reference to maximum residential building height that calls for this amendment. Under Land Use Regulations, on page 10, the Specific Plan states, "All new construction will have to comply with the City's 2.5-foot height limit". The City of Walnut Creek has an expanded definition of the 25-feet height Limit that is not stated in the Plan, which has caused some confusion among some of the residences of North Gate. The purpose of this text amendment is to state the City of Walnut Creek's expanded definition in the Specific Plan. According to the City of Walnut Creek development regulations for residential zoning districts (City of Walnut Creek summary of development regulations and definition of exceptions to height are attached as Figure 2) the maximum residential height allowed is 25-feet, with the provision that the height maybe increased by four feet if at least 75%of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:12 or greater (diagram for determining roof pitch attached as figure 3). The County has no such provision in its code. Since the inception of the Plan in 1991 it has been the practice of the County to clear building permits for residential structures over 25-feet, to a maximum height of 29-feet, if the plans had the City of Walnut Creek's stamp on them. This is done in recognition of the City's provision for the 25-foot residential height Limit. To make the Plan consistent with itself and to bring it into alignment with County practice's, staff is recommending that the County amend the North Gate Specific Plan to include the City's provision for height. V. CEQA CONSIDERATIONS For the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA), an initial study/checklist was prepared and a negative declaration was posted on June 6, 2005 for a public comment period that ended on June 26, 2.005. No comments were received during the public comment period. G:\Current Plan ningkurr-pian\Staff Reports1SP050001.stfrpt.jvo.doc i LLJ • ' "S - !.�. •.•;••1. i•"rt`• :`•`s•i•s "wrr s`i:o s`••'•'a'•••:•••• s•s r••11r••• I. •1.1.wMI i 1`w`• •Y• •'.«•MI••••• 1r •r•Mi r1•i ` ••1 '.Ir•I•I••«`a•`•• •r•w r r•r a•.♦ •a•s r •w•s 1••• •!.••M••r•••.••wi•1 wM1`•••1•••r t♦ i•+•+!•••s••• •+ •••r!• ••w r•i w+•••rte•+r•r. •r r r••s•i••• •••i w w a 1 w i i•i f 1 i••• ••w0 i•{'1 •••1 0 1••i!•i f ••1If••••••rIi wIw++•i1 ilii••ii•••+1+a• •1•• +• .0 • • 1 iw cu ••••+` • ••••i•••••w r•••1 w •1.•I ••w•i• •a ••••••••1•••••_••••••• r••• •`• • , `.w i••i+1 . •II•!+ w.Ir•.•• r` •i:wiirs i•i•0.0.00.0+i Ii i .0 0• 1 ••w•i•iM•s r.I••••••••10 1••ri•• 10.. 0 srii•••r• 0 w .r•r•i •w••r •••+• It, ••i•••+ s•'••w•w ••tart •' ••••••i i t•••• t i i w r �r`•1 .w• • i.f it i r aws•a•• i&.•rw• r•r • ri1• YrI•. `•I.riw••�w •i1•ii*`i•ti I11I,•sat•1.i i i i` •• • •� •r:!.• +• i i w•wit••t•.M••I i+••0 r ` • r 1 r I••• r i r••.•t 1•0000000000 ••r•w •i•••wi•M U .w• •••r•w r w 1 t•t•i i r+w•i••. •a w•1!a s•• s•i•s+••sIr�isrs••I!•• ••••w 1.i•rtr ••rr • • ter •• ••• • •a•i�•. r••• s•r\. s.• rr• r•••a r•r•• • . \••" ••• 01.1*•i••••s•a•• i •• •w 00 I. •I•Ir i••• wa# 1••• w ia••s••s w• ••i • •I' CJ cu wl LU CL is oMI 1 I i•., LU •1.1 •.•Iw1•••�•�r',•t'•i•+I+y•aa`wa `I'1� CD ••w•' ••• •�• • • a `''••'I'iaiai`i`1••••.1+•I.;•1:•1 •a•I• �r�y••••••••w•r•• r"••ri. j//y••••••11'r1"`Ir s s•I•'ii1••r•`w1.r`i w••+t`•I• `Iii •'••••I.:•a•11'r'w«rr•••.•I.is` r`.i:•ia.rli`i i 11wi11 �j/�� _�• • � ••.I#• • ••s•ilii r �� i•�i� . •''i•i " '•\•'•I•i•'•i'i••as1 ,r •I•ii1.1•:`•••+•r•riririlr'' ••• I••"' r•ia ••# •1•••• `.`r ai w1 ms`s:iwlr• •!. :. ::1.1 :.:••I•w••' • i •:•i•:••••••1••• 1 •!•r • Ir•ir1•••••t r{•••• •IIw j{,,+�7� • 'Iia• ''•"• •••••••r •••� •#f +ice •�'' •:•'•:`••`4" •r•••"••r1••+•r/1r1•`••i" i•w• i••M•'•`••••••f••••• 1 r• •! •`•+ir'• Iw•ria ins• t•• • ••i •• o.o. 1 i•• • •:•1�• V r�•• ••• • ••`ra.1' "-1••w 111w ••`!!`•i• '`••'•• r •\I!'• .•`.wa••r••♦•. •• s s•t i••.•••1 i♦ 1I1 1 •Ir •+••i•••r• w 4••ar•`• •••i••r ! -•'+!�•I•♦s ar•i •• ' r r •w r••••r••••iii����......rrrJJ1JJ1llIIII ••i i i! •• •1`1a • s•♦i• • •r•«• •••• • rri. I•w1•.•w`•i.r s•••i•1•r.r.I1••w`••••/••i`rr ir••`w•M` ••` `I•rI.•r•I.•I'a' 1i `i•�•.`iiii••1 s`w.iie wr iiai •.0.....o�r`a•••ri •IIIc • •r i. 1. •i•i Iii ..Iaw r• �1� .i • i rlti 'Ili..I..••ii'r . •ti• aa.•• ••s• '+'••♦• ••. :`: !r ii :• Ir `•.•1a1+rt•1. •• '•i i•••+'• •a1`11 • '•••i i w1 I w`i•Io0.i w •Iii.w•••• •i III w1.r ••�•I. .. ••••r••• •1•ss1'1• • •.1i�11.r.1"1 + .••i••1r 0. •i •• s r w •r•w 0,,� -am.. ? 41• t!••••••••w i•a M 1•• •1 •1 s••Iw•r•!. 1.•w#i r i t!1••!1•r••i r w •••• •••••r.+.r•r•r•r•r••+r••••.•••. •i w••i••i f i••••T s ••••!• ` i••w i!•i•• s r i I goor •.••••• ••1 1 ••r•M•w••••• ••••••• ••• .•i.1•••i•�• •■•••••r:r•••••w .0.00900000"o. •••••• r a1••s••r1/•i+•0••`I••i••••r M"••t•I Iwli`• Ir'ra{rIw•a• ••4 r•r w Iw!•••t 1•• •"•• ••••M I•iar w••_f•1{i••i i•i i!.i l i i s i• !!i0•R•i•1#i •I••••••r♦•1 •••••••••••••••••••• ••••••i ••I•1•••ww•• ••..!•♦••\♦•t•w 1•f 11•IIF.••r•Its 11••' .`•r••+.i ldol arvvea •••#••• ••:r•••a 1 i••.r•i•••.•«•• i••••••••t••a••i••••r i r•••1•••••••••r•••I•r •!•••a•••i•iaf!i!•f••••i •r•♦f w!••1 f•f•r •i i ••w.r•••••••••••w•••••.•••f•••••••i•« .••••••. r si• w w!•w••.i••♦• 1 r••i w••••1•••r •�•••••••r ••..+I•r••i s•r i•i•••w•r r r 0006990060*r*see***r •r w.•f r r•w•r.r i w•••••w•••i•.••• •• r••••1 r•••I•'• 1 !r'.-••i•••+•w-+•r w•w.r••.r•1 r r•i 1••r••••a1••r' \\\` a 00••i I•e_w 1•i•00000000 1•••�+.i•I••i i•. !s•e•- .•.•.• •60 0«•• .••••••••i••w•r 1••••i ••!•.r.• •••e•t t••1••• +r • i •• .•••r••r r r•w r•w•••r•w•+•••••••••w••.•.•••. \\\ •i•a+i r:•:! i i• w••♦t i i{+r i•i!• Iiir1lii Ia•I �"y • 1�•.t••.•`•�fasla•• .rwr•••w•••••�i�1••` •!/1•rr• r�r(}j1i,�j • w•s w r a• .0o.....!•!•iwrt 1t*. •w !. 'r`• •••••••w s•i i•M• 1 r••r 1i t«• •111• •r«r•1•i ra••M r •i•M•r•••M••rr•s•••• :••1• 1 •♦f•f•••f•••1• •i 1 •i i i!•••f••• t w i ••1 r••♦•••••1.I••I• ••=w 1 i••••i w a r •i•• •R• 1` •M•w•••1•• •• M •• i•••♦•••••r `.• 11• ...ariww I• It`•i•i•w i Iii wi••.."w i.. .I.s {lam �/ i•• wr •••iii •t••• r•••r .`•`+.•.w••1• I` • •i r i•e•i r a w s 1•.•I{•• I Is.w•••••• • •t:•: +1•r • a s .i i•••••• ••1.0••v 11 r r+ .•{••r s• •• r w • r1•••Y•••••r•i i• w•.• f ••M• •i••=•••rw•••••r •! •• •• ••i w s! ` •«•i•••i• •• •• • 1 i•r•r••i•• ` •r ri•••• s •• •i i• ••r•••iI ••••.. • •• . ..•• I••. •• • \•• I ••.•ir 11•IIw•II .I 1 1•1 r••• •♦••r i t a••i•�!t•••1 s i i i•t•r e t ••...•I I:Ir.�I w:Ir i rIi• a`i r\i 1••!i••t ��i/• wlr••. i I i.i••••4•• •••f i--�r •wriw•.•r•w•r••••riiw••-.0• • .Ia t f•f 4•••• is••w1+••••••w 'I•`i1{••as ala I+••:.!0.1..i+ •'• S •Ya' 1 011•`.0** •1• •0s w*0010`• i/� (}��• •••i •• 1•••!• •• •{ 0000000 0 I •I I a w*.aa.........i •i • I ,. .:�+:=•«•r riI I r e•aril.r�.w.••• a:`I• •r11 as:I r•i w•• .laa r w 'Irr•`•rI r w•.a I.••11a.•1••� ••• •••r r•I r•w w ••••• w•1i •= •••••r \• .• •.w.!•••rr as ••.•• :.r11 r. t e w'. r••i w iw.w • •I•. �y • Iw•••11•1 ••••a..r r••i I`• J1` •• • •r'1t••ww MIr 1 � •• I.w•1r`�•w!a•s•1•I•.•``i 1 • •r• www•••••I• ��f•r�•II.�•r 11 1! .w ..r•♦• +••••r•• 1•wi I. •M ri Iwo.I- • •I4 •♦f i i «I•.III.I.. • i i//r. ••i r rem C .-1 i..� Ap .._ T a: t { a 1 U i z N U) N N N N N N ! N N �I vLO Oho 0 0 0 0, " N -= Ln t0 M 41 0 U') N M ° r••( C� •� N CEJ CSI N N N N a� M c o _ •- a� 49 ' I ..r � Cly a) 0 0 ANA C:) tQ I o o o 0 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 0 '�' Oemomp U) 0> \ \ \ \ ! \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ � J � Q o o � o � o 0 0 0 o o 0 0 0 _. `. C O ` ~ jLn Lo I OiLosO o O IO ' O ( O O OZ N Cr) �t t' � Ln Ln co Zv3- >o .>oo go> O 0 a) O � U) ° en Ocn �- � D o O O 'i a3 ``- (1) r ♦.. >' p O Ln LM LO Ln { Ltd ' Ln O I v � tM O 0 C C N •0 o L,. N N r r r- 0 Cr M .O 4 -- r r O ; o RZ t0 r t- ,r- v^� v o �-' V U %i I I Ln -a '`' � `' o N � � m O 'II ._ L. L. .� 'L7 a) O -v � � � O O O O o O as o C O a� E T- o o U o M LO o o O O Co N � C — •� � �, o _ o O O O M M 0 ,Cn -0 O -� C .0 a V C o o > � = p O -V td Q ` F = C = d� L1. NC a > m M CD 0 SC m y. C tp �-- .Y •� � C � a) t0 U. cn 4-11 O O O ` 0 - W a O O `.. U) c .tl Cr .E .....cc _C:r O C !'d U) N O a) O � � .0 r Q tM 00 cn a� ,cn - U- -C O c� .�• c � Eo � � y � ' C -c M = '- o 0 = "w •- 0 .� CO Glam CN�.. Lt) LO Q r r r- V .� U U U UL) M O =3 C: M U) 0" C% •� V tQ r-- � .� �. �.. E - O O � comm• C O LCA to Ln LO UD Ln M U") ._ a) ` C - 4? � > O GROWN7 r- = E ca c � � c CD c a� 0 C: 0 C: LM E as ° o a-•�-.- O L.. E0 0 I C ._ 1, c OD c: � cU � M _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Ln Ln Ln :�. ca E Ec� o t- c in p CD 0 o O M (� Ltd r -- r- r- •0 O � >+ ''+- � L• N N N N N N r N � -0 � .,C O __ p 'p � C O _C U. cc comma E 46- 70 -1000 CD v _ 0Z - MEME v -E c CSL .0 � M �•TO ,♦.; O C C C o Ca cLlF0 Cn I I I .� n, v ello 0 LTp _. C cn d. �+ o O O O O � ' U, Q j Q Q <t Q Q o cn o .� Ln •� o Cu (1 Ln Ltd N O O \ O C/� --�%t ,0 C IWO00' 1 . Z Z Z Z Z Z _ _ _ Q� ._ ... U cc to C T. Cu •` o a a) -0 C: = C: >% a) a) CO (D 0 66-0 CL 0 0 U) -W .0 C Lt) v ., Q. i rn 06 i l i I I1 I .! - A% M o CL) o _ c� o [� r- p M O o C c ._ -..., 0 a o O .J o '`, .tt tet- cv o oao ti ff r 0 0 0 �; :_ -*Z -� c .�.r C c o co cn a) EIMM ,+,,, v •r t-- r M CO � LT-C p �,,, -O R3 N •'' C Q. 7C , C . O L - C U i O C L. -` .0 .o 4--a O `� U O 0 + i o a � .� a) cU w.. 1 I I ..... = .�., O,� '.� O C o C ' } C .- 4- .0 CN ._ W Cn ' .�.. O M LII ._ O O .«.,. _ -O CD Cl) rj) ,C c o -0 CO C •p OCe. I=- C� v o 0 0 o O L. 00 a o U cU �•- -� v N -- '- O O C ..0 N C ._ .0 p Z7 Z 0 O O O O O .- 6. SEC i , O In O M O N .- :2 LtJ X ai I O �. n3 � >, O _ .a O �,,, E to O O Q Q r CO ' N N r t-- o r a) -C C C ``- >,'C C CL �.. C i } CO i I C o - .t� 0 ,� .+.a U 0 O GOMM 6. UJ O s o = O o � ,� .� a� _ tr z m E CD o o O � o , o 0 0 0 0 ' 0 , 2� 0 — � — N ': 0 0 0 0 0 � O ; o o p o �' � m o � .�c O a� � c' � a-s } 1 ; ofoo 0000 .CU, ..... U0 ._ cUo vim . Z o o O O O Ln o 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 ..-� Co C 0 _ M o > LU CnO o Ln i N , o M Co to Ln t o 0o M ; Ln E `�- -n a� ° L) = a� Cl) 0 p Q o N C r.• Cf) '� CZI r t- i �- r r- I I C �'' C ` C .0 > 6- J LL ` C) a3 tU .02:, C6 Cn O m > O C a O C � � Q = 0� I - CO E cn .- LL CD 0 O � O ; Lrn : N : o ; �? : : En Ln ! cr? © 0 ` _c .c .c E CO o pCM C r•+ Cy r- r' r CC) C'P i C CN C%4 � U C p V C O •� + , cn = {.. M AIILUB-.i AIBU!C aidt tnuu n1 n City of Walnut Creek Municipal Code, section 10-2.1.303 38. Building Height: The vertical distance at any and all points on the site between the base elevation and the top elevation directly above the base elevation as defined herein. The maximum building height is regulated by each zoning district, but in no case is more than six stories above existing or finished grade, whichever is lower, not to exceed 89 feet. a. Base Elevation: The existing or finished grade, whichever is lower, as shown on an approved topographical survey of the site at the time a Design Review application is submitted for approval of a structure on the site, or in such cases where Desig n Review is not required, at the time a building permit is submitted for approval. EXCEPTIONS: (1) Where unusual deviations occur in the existing grade such as a small swale, or the property is located in a flood plain, the Community Development Director may make minor adjustments in the building height envelope to permit reasonable building design consistent with the intent and purpose of the building height standards for that zone. (2) When a subdivision has been approved with grade changes on the property, the approved grade changes yet to be completed shall serve as the existing grade for the purpose of defining base elevation. (3) Where fill is required on a downhill lot to increase the building pad elevation to provide gravity flow to the street for sewer and/or storm drainage purposes, the base elevation shall be the approved finished grade. b. Top Elevations: The highest point of a structure. EXCEPTIONS: (1) Pitched roofs, with a minimum of three and twelve pitch, occupying at least seventy-five percent of the horizontal roof area and having a ridgeline, shall be measured four feet below the highest ridgeline unless the building height to the top of the parapet is greater, in which case, the building height shall be measured to the highest point of the structure. (2) Antennas, spires, and flagpoles mounted on top of a building shall not be included as building height. (3) Solar collectors, skylights, chimneys, clerestories, and housing for � elevators, stairs, and mechanical equipment, shall not be included as building height provided they do not exceed a height of twelve .feet above the roof, and when combined, do not occupy more than twenty- five percent of the horizontal roof area and are designed in architectural harmony with the building. (4) Small architectural elements which add variety and landmarks to the City skyline, providing the overall building height remains within the height limits. NOTE: Exceptions (1), (3) and (4) are not additive. jot FAN Figure 3 Determining Roof Pitch _ ,z 1 „ ,o Steep 1 e 7 G Moderate y T q T 3 Siigfit z Flat rl The pitch of a roof i*s calculated by the number of inches it rises vertically for every 12 inches it extends horizontally. For example, a roof that rises 3 inches for every 12 inches of horizontal run has a "3-in-1?" pitch. North Gate Specific Plan Adopted by the Board of Supervisors June 25,1991 tie Sp �� o � y a 0 f OSS Ly G �o Creek & CO A Joint Planning Effort between the City of Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County TABLE OF CONTENTS t. INTRODUCTION Location and Description of the Specific Plan Area Purpose of Specific Plan for the North Gate Area 1010 . _ 1010 . . . . _ 1010 . . . . . 3 11. GOALS & POLICIES FOR THE NORTH GATE AREA Land Use 1010 . . . . _ 1010 . . . . . . . . 0 . -0 .0 . . .0 . Is . _ . , _ _ . . . . . _ OR . . . . . . . 4 Recreation 1010 . . . . . . , 601 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 . . . . . . . _ 10 0 6 0000 5 Open Space and Conservation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ _ . . . . _ . . . . . . . 5 Community Design . _ . . . . . . . . . _ . . . _ . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . . . . . _ _ . . . . . . _ 6 Scenic Views and Road Design 1010 . . . . _ 1010 . . . . . _ 1010 . . . . . _ 1010 . . . . . 7 Public Services and Facilities 1010 _ 1010 _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ 1010 . . _ . _ g Ill. LAND USE REGULATIONS LandU . . . . . . _ • _ _ _ . . . . . . . _ . . . . . 1 . . . . _ . . . . . _ _ . _ _ . . . . . _ V Land Use Categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . _ 1010 _ 1010 . _ 1010 _ 1010 . 14 Zoning1010 . _ . . . _ . _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . _ _ . . _ 1010 . . . . 15 Allowable Land Uses 1010 . _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ 1010 . _ _ 1010 . _ 1010 . . _ _ 1010 . . . 15 Development Regulations . . . . . . . . . . _ 1010 . . . . _ _ . _ _ 1010 . _ 1010 _ 1010 . 18 Traffic and -Circulation _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ 10 10 _ 10 . 0 . . _ . . . . _ . _ . . . . . . 23 Recreational Trails _ _ . . . . . . . . . . . _ 1010 . . _ . _ 1010 _ 1010 . . . . _ _ . _ 1010 . 23 Property Owned by the County 1010 _ . . . . . . . . . . . . 1010 . _ _ 1010 1010 . . . _ _ 27 Historic Preservation We PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Nonconforming Land Uses 1010 . _ 1010 . . . _ . _ 1010 . . . 1010 1010 . . . . . 29 Exceptions to Requirements _ . - . _ 1010 . 1010 _ _ . . . . _ _ 1010 _ 1010 . _ 1010 . . _ 30 Joint Review o.f Development Applications General and Specific Plan Amendments Affects of Proposed Projects Equestrian Staging Area Mutual Jurisdictional Adoption of Pertinent Ordinances _ 10 10 _ 10 10 . . . . _ 32 Conformity with measure C 10 10 _ . _ . . . . . . . . _ _ _ 10 10 . 10 10 10 10 . . . . . 32 Development Fees _ _ . 1010 _ _ . _ 1010 . . _ _ 1010 . . _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ 1010 _ . _ 3 ? LIST OF FIGURES Figure I Vicinity Map .0 M a a 49 a 48 a * 0 0 a 0 is 0 • A 46 0 Is a ft M 0 a 0 a 0 a a C t 2 Figure 2 Environmentally Sensitive Areas i . . . . . . . . . . .. . ` . . . . . . . . . Z Figure 3 Land Use Alternative 2 12 Figure 4 Front Yard Fencing Detail a a a a 10 -6 00 a a 0, a 0 a M, 10 -a 0 dD 49 -0 -V a a 0, Is 0 a 20 Figure 5 Natural Watercourses-in North Gate • 0 0 a 10 10 .91 . . Is a .0 .6 In . . -0 a 0 M 0- .8 0, a • ? Figure 6 North Gate Road Improvements 24 Figure 7 Castle Rock, Road Improvements 25 Figure 8 Planned Recreation Facilities and Trails 26 North Crate Specific Plan Contra Costa Courcy Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 1. INTRODUCTION Location and Description of the.Specific,Plan Area The North, Gate area consists of approximately 507 acres and lies wiffiin the jurisdictions of the City of Walnut Creek and Contra.Costa County. The North Gate area is accessed from Ygnacio Valley Road, which is a major arterial extending from Interstate 680. Figure 1 is a vicinity map of the North Gate Specific Plan area and some of the surrounding open space and agricultural lands. The Specific Plan area extends from the intersection of North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road south to the public park lands and then east to the City of Walnut Creek's sphere of influence boundary. The City of Walnut Creek Iles west of the Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan area is one which is semi-rural in character and includes low density development, public park lands and commercial and-private equestrian facilities. Other land uses include open grazing areas, kennels and animal grooming uses, public lands currently utilized for flood control purposes and vacant land on sloped hillsides. The northwest portion of the Specific Plan area, which is within the qty's boundaries, is developed with single family residential homes on 12,000 and 20,000 square foot lots. The land in the County includes an 88-unit clustered planned residential development, with provisions for the boarding of 44 horses on-site. Other homes in the County include ranch-style homes, typically one story in height, many without formal landscaped yards and newer, suburban-style residences which feature Targe structures on one acre lots with landscaped yards. These newer homes may also feature pools, paved recreation areas such as tennis and basketball courts and heights up to two stories 35 feet. Mount Diablo State Park, Diablo Foothills Regional Park, and the Lime Ridge and Shell Ride Open Space areas comprise some of the land uses surrounding the North Gate.area. These parks and open space areas are in close proxisettingto North Gate and contribute to the physical of the area. Approximately 2,000 acres located directly east of the Specific Plan area are designated for agricultural and open space uses and are currently under Williamson Act contract. Although the Specific Plan does not include this agricultural area, it is the County's and City's intent that these lands continue as agricultural, open space or park uses. 1 r t ' t el . '•/!i•!!i••r.'••ii•.i••rw.•0••�!!•••4•Mia•••iiw•r!.•l••awi•i .i!io••wia•.•it.#ilii••i••iiir•••i•!•!•i•••eii•i••iiaais!•a orri l•i!ali:s!•ili•a ii•iis.•aa•!r•!!a••!i• •4/Ifiw!wii�••!i i•a!!seeiWE isi.iri ••air ! rawe #ir • i•;ia• . i•i• i !/•• •a•!••i!•i•i•a!M i• !rw!••r/..!!•ie•aaa••waii•r•ai•ir • i••iii•••iia!!arai•i••i•••tM el!etr•r••• i •• •i. alsri!!•i••ii#iii! • iiii• •i lIlrr• !••►• •m• ai! ;•i••• • am, •i •+ M ••••i•i!i i•• ••r••a lb 410!i•••!•i!r •••••!•••••• •!!•!ii#i iiii•••raM•• ••i•••••i•• i i a•a i•i i!i•r!i•!•a i i 00000 0•!•r•• •a•••i i!•!!• •••aim al is i�/i i•aiMa i1••las ala a•a• r;•.Ii•ii q►• ••aa•i•iiiir•••i••a••r a•!e!l•ia•a• •••a l••••r 0- so .••.• i !• ia•iirriir•w••iisoa a•iirra e 40•!•r• •tiny •• ai i•• i:ile.0•/si!•!•ai•!•r/!l ii e•n! a•• a•• sales /irasr•ai•ii aia••iari•r•iaa am • • !••iii a 111 li lees i•r••i•a•!!rail as t • soil• • iirl•iril•i•iiii!!••!r• •!• �w� •!Weil ii rials i•l •i•ai••r li is i!• •iiiii • !i a!iii!i am•a i#!iiia•r •• ! # 00!60 r U. ii r ��1•�I•!�r�Mi# r �•M r 0 �! .0.• ri•al• • ilili••ii l�iaia•llli iaa• •• • a!• !l a•i •wa•!!!=•0000 *0ai4t i>� • • •!•••• ar•#• •0 iiil•••a•r • • •• .a• •i i•• 000i•lairil•iiri•000•ri• r!a i ��•S� r!00l•!ii•0 em ail•e!a iii1siM•.ri•!!Maa i i••••• •0i••I iri•aiil!i iti•i•ii•!a ii•!a iii•i il••a•s•r••r!•!i•iroi•i•wri•l•i i•w r1iii•i.!••!•i!s•iwe•!iaial•ia•l•• ••ii•!•••!�r/•�ia••i• r• w � i i•ri •i1• aiaa MI 00a04Pli0•0 moo ! •a •iairii/l • mii• /iai!iri��-00 ifa !ia•Vii•r•ai! 0000 . 0al i a i•! � e!••!!•i!!a a ii •a!•i ifl•e0i 1i!M0i•a•!i!iii• •ii i0•i••• •,a i rr•! er ! ••!•ai.i•iaiM• w ••a•i a!r r•a ia!1•i•l•!1 r i 1 ia!i•w i•li•a a i i i i w! a il 1ii r4a a m i o ii! ;•0010 1 0•0 i• ! 1• riri i i•a i 1im ••i a!••i•a••• !•! • ! •a a 0r!!••• •e00aii eve/i - ICU •i••w a!i i r r•i•!i i a i i•i!••a 1•i•• •0!• •t r i s!a!!m a a i 1 r i•i r r w i 0 i!.i•#i !•••r a :• ••• • ••• !Ole"i • •a i!!!sale l• •w•i M!r•• i i r i 0!!a!r 0 w••a!••w;•• r soft w•i• ••f a•m•!!••i••M•0 e m l i r s •i••# •�•i ear !•!w.•w rrl.lrr.wr ••!• "*. 000006060 01000 •• ♦•••••!!!i!!.•lar:•# !w r ii �.• • •m•• • M r• LL • { is lr• �! Oar/ •i!:• - • _•• • a!t ...i . • �•/� .iii.. • �-Il�r"1 • ����!•���r•r ••!•iMiii•e••♦•r!•rs•i••a•r•ivea�!ea!••i••••!e••«ii••a 1 ilM!ever i•iw••m•a�i0a!w_i•!i!i i0i•_a••lw e iw••oM#•ri!•rs!w••1•i!i•••!0•i•.!•.*•af•i•wr•iitr!ii.iaa•s!•ewe.•wir1ii rM�l`ir•r••r`a-:i••wi il_••Mw!•waaw••ii i♦i•••Ws••••••r•!+aie fia!•••iake4 W�•••.�i f i•eaa•�•i••r•i:+!.l•iw•.•a••••�.iw•a•�•.••i•a1=�.•a•i !i••i!w••i•r•d!•;T.•!.'�i•.•r_i•r�•!i•ir!•i•a4si••.•i-•••'••••••••��h•i!•wa•ww•�•i~•••a_i=a!••t r�•••••i•!••�• ••.ifi_•i r.•i.•!:•iw•a•!••awr• •arM•0•awi•rw•:a!i0•re�.!e•:r••••a•r••_.eiai••ar•i10•w•!r•••a•i•#•#r0i••w!•e••w•rriii!•••.=•i:i•.r_a r i♦l•!•ti.•••ra•lqW•ry iY'pia_t•:.i••.!•ioei•W•a m;!f iie_!i 1aramr•��"•ve•��• •e•rl•ila••••a i•i�•1 a•M•ir aw,iM•i•r Ti�ei•f•••!t!li•!•i!�••/!ii••-�!•_•+i.•r�!.•i r••=C•w:W,••••'�•asir.!i••is•!I.iia•••l••••!i•;Ii:p!•i ei•!s•••r•r•a•i•1•!!i•1•••'aa••0!• r•:••uia•i�i iy`.•i•••!••wri•.•;!ss'+i••lra!ri i•••/i••i•i�•w`a lr!isw e•! Cu CL We •eIl•iiS•!/i•i+•„•`•:•r!i•r ••aia iii••a•rri•l•'r•••.!r•!•r•ria!ti l!•s•w••lsw•a•!_r!-_•!w•r!•!! ai!•ar•-rim•••w•i•r r•iiw i!••r•wt•!•!f e r iao•r•i a/r wi-•r!r•••ii ili•i!•!••irlr!i !•0�aas•!••wa•Mie•s:ir!•sa.ri iii•.er!•a•jt iiw•W!a a!••ie!i.••w a•i•aa�iii• •ri iwrr -•i!#a•• it•i •/ia•#ir•i/•i li••r•;Mi ••� i•i•a• •!i 04, #• • �i i 41 '60 _•w•i i:• ii ile1 • • i as 0 dz i..oft i •.i • •~1!•M•!i•!iei!•• *,*am• i ai•r•i i •!i iiair a ia 0 i i!t . oi CL) a •r000!6406 ii !•W.wa •iii1•••ri 0% 000 0r••r_•.!••!aewr•M!••• w• ia•i i• •R! i�•*r\!i •. i#! `�•r•• •••.i••••, •W�!ll��a !t�'�- � ; �••r_-i�!rf!�•�.��/e.-- C�r••s+•••.•.•:•ii:1.r•!eei••r!•!l•i•.r.•♦i1•i••`r`•arw+i.:•:�••••••••!•ai•.••ir ra a••r`.•ir`•f:ri•rM_•.a•-•i r%••♦•.r rrWo..r•rr••sr+•w!•!M•.tr•le•.Wra••••••••.••a•e r1 a.•1.•if iW:i.•e•�es.•.•i••••fri•�f•t•ve•ea.i♦i•i•r•ve..vei•r lIr•wwei•1i+!•!••Mw.i•i••:e i1.•i�r r.l•r.i•••:w••••I.•iews ar•••ww•.•e=•••eti••••i1i•i.a••W:•i•.!-•e•w:a•�••Mr w•!!••rw r.r r li•r•ii•1.r••a+!r iewi•••iw•W•ir•�r!s!�•i.:••i.!a i•riW•.•!i I w••!w•.ai•••.il••e i•ai.a.r•M!•w1i•••lri•w••rfwtem r�M i+a••m i iw r♦w•.swi!ir.•rir•i.•i!w•er•!•!.raii•••i•••s•••ai••i••••ri•W•i•i 0-•ai;•s••i•• r••e�l•i••iwrriw•r•eiai•i•t+•!i•!M♦i•i+•ra•i w i•.i w••is=0 r�iii!•=•rt•r.••.W•••..•••w!W i ir•••aa•i•iW1••wr•ii•s1!re!1r.M.•i••a!•r!Mri!veir•I•ia!i::.la�ir e I•!arm •ii.••i`r•�••aia!••:i•!a!•i l•i.•i•=.•!!e:•m iw•••••l•r•••rir!!ali!w0 i 1•MOi• •mr ii••i•i•vra!rerrw•=•�..ia_i1� e.•!we!iei1f!!. !..ii•!•••r!•••!••r!.!rra•.!ar•_w•.!!•a!tIw•iai•0e•.e!••M.••s•i i 0 ir••i1i.M••r i.oi••••e i.I w i•••W••:•ir•i••r W••!••.!ir i wm•iii•sm iis.wii••e i i,•a•s!•••wr•=0'ri eWwr•aMr 1•f•w iMi!wMa.0.i e 1 �•wr.•r•a•!!•r:iii•i!..r•O•�.•r•�r�!i••i�as!ii•r•w e-.•M••_••!•a•=i•.�o!0i0rii i•!Mr wM rlr ii i rr•r•!w!r rirrsi:•i1 iaw i..iWire ea•.• a.0 rf.e_••ii••aa•.e:i.w• 0•i:.iair!i a••.rr!••e!rwr m•:•.!r ii Mw •!r•!a.•r•1 s�!0 ii••rY•li i 0wrir_awiair i i•s 1eia lfl a•!i.••0•.i.!!e•r.i •e i !ai.. • . !a ••! !0• • .softswa00 • -We !- a 00 so !• w•• ! •0 . ! i a• ••!i a 0••• !• • 0a •!• ! •• i!iiwi a VI !•ai •iia _riir •f i�lla a ir!!i i•eri •r ••i eai!rr•!iW•ie0 i•iiir i4 r•r ir rr..i•!le a•!0ia••W•.i ew•••s•ri•t•w•e!iwe i r• !if••0•lw•a ri1i• 1a••a•••!a ateirw Wll i•!a•r•• !#••aria irw!ii aei••w#• ••1i e••ar!ii!i r.iw t•a••1•a!• •i• r e!e••••f••!./w• 1#•11r.••i•!•sie w•a•••iw ai s veri••i!e••w0 !ve•_.•••l• .!=iri•�r •.••••!•..frra••.rl 1r r i!.••••i• w!•.•'!iii m W.•rt M!•�s;••i•+w !•.•i ii w!i•s r!.!••l•moi'••0 s•.!!!•iti!i•1a••m e i ii•r a; !wowl r 1• • !•M#t.w•ii•rw i. /•r •.•ri•!a•ie! i• l e•1 i•r• i• a �ii•!•rli!a ei!!!ri i•Ir afff 1•••raa•Ir•i••w /iW �•ra •••l•!•ai•Mi m•a./I0a J•i r!a•Iw •(•mo!/e iI r40i•/i•l.•!i•!••.•d 0•r0rw:0ii•i• •i.!•••l •!••1••••e•i• 0•r iw••M•i•e!••i•a•i•:wi•rV:00.0 •.••••r!!•• .i 0•ii i*ri!i•i i•r•.rr••r I.s••fe••••!:•wo•_•••l•i•a ii!•••w!a a•i••s!••rw_••• r`i!irr r•i!!wi w.rr !li•r•••• •••t.•••••i ii••#•i a•••0!ei ••••. •i• i.i•r. •••wrr••.a e.r••r;•w:•••e •i+s•;•••esa=i•er.i•!••• •e•!•!!r a••« _!•• 0•r• w t•••o• • •w.ri r•i i.+ •r r r _ lr r !•w i. !0 e r• ••.•••r• •• • .. •Y• e • •+ i! • f ••i+ !r •i•:ii• • ie• ..:w. "Ma. aori• wr.r• !.• :rai • lir: ♦i•• we • 00 0 i !:r!! We eaw • 0.0 wlar a o,�i00 • •*e• war r • . 0 •!•rr •0400 for— •• !••: ve.rr ii rltow a a �Wa •«l wi o•••era we •!ae.- • :as :•i i awe.wee Weer• W#i !!!i••ira•i.-so•_••••i•• •a r lwai�•i ••iwa. .•=s•ew•.••••!i•wa!••r •.!•r i1• .. m i w i . -.0 ! :aii' • �_ •ia•wr•#•.i ! i • ai •eir•rrm!iiar •f•a•rai• .i.a _r•a•.0 •e a•a olewaaimaii 0400.wr.mi•foo• iri w: airVS •i w i� -.•r ew 040 a 41P •!!!i r�+��iiiisir: i•a•aa iia:agri•:•i••sa_. iw•w _0.00000•r• i•rr.0!00i0 e•a!•i•i.a•0a••r•i 1 also.000.a!;i0.0000- Samoa oo.*Ooeooaoo .i_!re!a•_aao..•eaea•asw woo w.• •i •.ai ri!! •w.a•r i so!••i•• era!•r•.•wIw1a•owes*•awe*0 r• •r• •iislasce !oarimsaliio! r .r si 00. s!•rr•0!!0!10 !•e•a i!.a W! isea s• ia000000 w! ._ _ ...i..r • a •! eawr1•. M.Iii•w•1•!••aiii•e r••1••.•ae!• ea• i 0.0-ft.... w • a aia wis wi!r•0 0•ai.•0i.!.r w 0 a•i=! ear memo! a0la1i0i0l0i0• go ir•ai..w 1ti• i •00l0w•w•• ••r••a!ii .•••liiaa.welerw0 a ••rii /•.• ! i/eeer•i•i••a i•i! •1! wrli•• •r••`Y•e !ri 0i•wra• m •a f i••!•iw w ••aM•!waw!••em•!•• ! •• am • eiiieWi••'MMai W••iw1i••.iw/ia•• a...toi! •00 •..•. ...Yf0a•i.;_i!i• 00 i ai1•i•0r••• ii !.••iw•• 0•s••!•w!rira•!ii•!irw•a •••w•o!•Yi iwlrOi e• W—rsw = We :/•r 0.000 we. r i 0 •a 0i m• • w! •w e61..• !Wr0•.••.!•i.ili•0 i!ilie 0..w! .•i 0•0!r 0• i •` •lew*l. 000-Wo..!0e•0 401 W• M w 0•!i!•0 r.ww r i r_• !•.r aa••_-010 0. e w e r s•.!!•r•• all tir 1 r erX !a 0.00 • • • •••i•as r:w ir w! M«w•ir•w e• ii ii �F .w 0.ws .. ••r•..i .w...1i•a`41 • •!!ir• .f••••w•.. . am 00.0 We.ra••ii•i it•11.was •i••••r!rww�rw••. w.• i ••r ! 1 ••♦•.•w err=i .i i•: . 41, WII .a- d Le It •o of r Me Wawa. e- 0. %1 ' aia# e. •t a •i• r' � • i North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 Purpose or Specific Plan for the North Gate Area California state law authorizes a jurisdiction to adopt specific plans regarding, any area covered by the jurisdiction's general plan to provide additional detail to the'implementation of the general, plan itself.* Because a jurisdiction.is authorized to adopt a general plan for any land outside of its boundaries which bears some relation to its planning, it is also authorized to participate in the preparation of a specific plan regarding any of the areas covered by the generalplan. It is for this reason that the City and the County are preparing and opting a Specific Plan for the North Gate area. The Specific Plan is the result of a joint planning effort between the City of Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County. The basis for preparing this plan stems from a Memorandum of Understanding (MOS between these two jurisdictions. In the MOU, the City and County agreed to prepare a Specific Plan which has led to the creation of new policies and regulations for the preservation and future development of the North Gate area. The North Gate Specific Plan will provide additional guidance and detail on the protection of the North Grate area. North Gate is presently a transition area between the agricultural preserve/open space land and very low density single family development and, therefore, constitutes a semi-rural character. Because the North Gate area is located between the. edge of suburbanized development and regional open spaces, and because modem water and sewer services are now available to the North Gate property owners, city and county officials, the general public and local property owners are concerned about how future development will proceed in the area. The preparation, adoption and implementation of this Specific Plan will help guide this future development. 3 f North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 U. GOALS & POLICIES FOR THE NORTH GATE AREA Both the City_ of walnut Creek and the County General Plans contain numerous goals and policies which apply to development .projects throughout their respective jurisdictions. The application of these policies will continue-to apply to the Specific Plan area. The following goals and policies provide added detail for the, Specific Plan area.. Land Use Goal: Maintain and enhance the existing semi-rural character of the North Gate Speck Plan area as a transition from the suburban residential development to the north and west, to the agriculxural and open space lands to the south and east. Policies: 1. Restrict new projects to residential, equestrian and recreational facilities as tile. appropriate and primary use of the property. 2. Protect supplemental agricultural related uses from the encroachment of non- agricultural activities or development by use of land use regulations and permit procedures. 3. _ Ensure that the, new development is compatible with existing residential!3 , agricultural and recreational uses through sensitive design, the use of adequate buffers and innovative site planning techniques. 4. Protect equestrian uses and facilities from the encroachment of non-equestrian activities or development, where feasible. 5. Protect environmentally sensitive lands. 6. Limit densities on hillside properties with slopes between 15 and 26%. 7. Require larger minimum lot sizes on land that directly abuts public open space or agricultural preserve. areas. 8. Prohibit development within any required creek or seismic set bar....k: areas. 4 Norah Gate Specific Plan Coruna Costa Counry Board of Supervisors .lune 2.5, 1991 9. Allow only small, non-commercial, riculturally-related structures on slopes 26% or greater subject to the provisions found in the section on Development Regulations - Effiside Properties. 10. Maintain the feeling of"openness" in the area by encouraging large lot development, or the dedication of public or private open space through the planned development process. Recreation Goal: Provide a range of recreational opportunities to serve area residents. Policies: o 1. Provide fol--the. development of a new multi-use staging area for recreational trail users and possibly an equestrian center on the County surplus property adjacent to the Idosk at the entrance to Mount Diablo State Park. 2. Provide an equestrian trail connection from the new staging area to the, existing East Bay Regional Park District trail system through the Pine Creek Detention Basin. 3. Develop new trails along North .Gate Road for equestrians, pedestrians and cyclists. 4. Encourage, to the-extent feasible, continued operation of the equestrian facilities, riding academies, horse stables, and private ownership of horses in the area. 5. Maintain the Pine Creek Detention Basin as a passive recreation area. Open Space and Conservation Goal: Encourage the acquisition of additional public open space within the Specific Plan Area. Policies: 1. Work towards the preservation of the County's surplus property as public open space while limiting recreational activities such as a multi-use staffing area for recreation trail users and possibly an equestrian center. 2. Support the City of'Walnut Cre,=h1- in its efforts to purchase, additional open space near the entrance to the Shell Ridge Open Space Recreation Area. 5 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 3. Consider appropriate conditions of approval for P-1, Planned Development subdivision proposals which could require that some land within the project site be dedicated for public open space, particularly if the project site is located adjacent to existing public open space land. Goal: Protect natural features such as heritage quality- trees, creekr, kmolls, fidgelines and rock outcroppings. Policies: 1. Preserve to the extent feasible, creeks and riparian vegetation in the area. Enhance creeks and riparian corridors by revegetating creeks with native riparian vegetati9 on from local seed stock. 2. Ensure that any new parcel created along a creek or a stream is large enough to accommodate an adequate buildable area on the portion of the lot remaining beyond the creek setback boundary,, 3. Preserve healthy trams and maintain significant tree masses consistent with the requirements of the Walnut Creek Tree Preservation Ordinance.. Goal: Protect public open space and agricultural preserve landfirom the encroachment of residential uses and facilities. Policies: 1. Require larger residential lots and increased rear or side yard setbacks on properties that abut public open space or agricultural preserve areas. 2. Discourage public or private improvements within the North Gate area which could induce growth on open space lands located outside the Specific Plan area. Community Design Goal: Preserve the semi-rural character of the Speck Plan area. Policies: 1. Adopt design standards to regulate new residential development to ensure compatibility v&►ith existing homes in the area. 6 Y North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 2. Require landscaping plans for all new residential development,, Encourage the use of -drought-resistant plant material and discourage large areas of lawn which require frequent watering. 3. Encourage the grouping of structures on the.flatter portions of a parcel. 4. Require that the homes in new residential development along North Gate. and Castle Rock Roads face the roads. 5. Adopt standards for fencing to ensure that no solid board fences or walls are placed in front yards, or obstruct views at higher elevations. 6. Require buffers, such as landscaping,; or increased setbacks, between residential, equestrian or agricultural uses to minimize potential conflicts between these.uses, except as noted in Section N. 7. Require that proposals for new development and additions to existing structures be reviewed by a member of the. County staff and a member of the City staff to assure consistency with the Specific Plan. Goal: Preserve the historic and aesthetic resources located in the Speck Plan area. Policies: 1. Protect the James T. Walker house which has been identified in the walnut Creek General Plan as having historic significance. 2. Protect and maintain the. North Gate Road Improvement Association Reservoir Located along the eastern boundary of the. Specific Plan area as a visual amenity. Scenic Views and Road Design Goal: trews of ridgelines and Mr. Diablo from scenic routes shall be conserved, enhanced and protected, by regulating development along both Castle Rocl,-Rood and North Gate Road in a manner which mairuains Their semi-rural qualities. P olicies 1. Provide, a landscaping easement within the public right-of-way along North Gate Road. 7 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 on I Prohibit the installation of any solid board fences along North Gate and Castle Rock Roads. Require open rail fencing within the front yard setback on all properties fronting these roadways. I Require larger front yard setbacks for new structures along North Gate and Castle Rock Roads to minim=* obstructing views and to reduce impacts of traffic noise. 4. Require that all homes fronting North Gate and Castle Rock Roads be single story, no higher than 20 feet* 58 Acknowledge that Elie existing trees along,; Castle Rock Road significantly contribute to the visual quality of that road and that all efforts shall be made to preserve them. Public Services and FacitiEies Goal: To ensure an adequate level of public service to the area. Policies: L Require all new residential development to be connected to public sewers and the public water- supply. 26 Prohibit concrete sidewalks, street and Emit seet land the use of curbs and gutters to the minimum necessary for public safety. 3. Improve North Gate Road to a 60 foot wide right-of-way and Castle Rock- Road to a minimum 40 foot wide right-of-way. 4. Protect the North Gate Improvement Association Reservoir as an important private water source. North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 Ill. LAND USE REGULATIONS Land Use North Gate should remain an area which is primarily sena-rural, and which supports residential, equestrian and recreational. activities. Larger lots should be encouraged to preserve the. natural features and to allow residential and equestrian uses to exist in the same general area. New development should be compatible with the existing environment, in terms of form, scale, and architecture. New homes should be one or two -stories, no higher -than 25 feet. The. structures should be sited carefully, so as not to encroach on existing non-residential or open space activities. minimize Development on slopes greater than 15% should be limited to minimthe visual'impact of new iz- construction. Development is permitted on slopes greater than 15%, but less than 26%a Lots may be no smaller than 65,000 square feet. Development can be transferred from these slopes to a flatter portion of the site. To encourage this "transfer of development," density for the sloped areas can be calculated at one dwelling unit/40,000 net square feet. Structures that are grouped on the flatter portions of thesite must be on lots no smaller than 30,000 net square feet. Residential and commercial development on slopes 26% or greater, is prohibited. However, a small non-commercial, agricultural-related structures are permitted subject to the findings in thc I � 4= section on Development Regulations - Hillside Properties. Soil stability and the potential for erosion and landslides is a major concern. These lands are in the most visible. locations of the,project area and any development would interfere with views of Mount Diabloadjoini a regional parks and open space,areas. The density that could have been achieved on these higher slopes is transferable to other portions of the lot at a density of 0.1 dwelling unit per acre. Development rights must be deed restricted to the County or City as a Condition of approval for any development proposals on slopes 26% or greater. To minimize 'impacts between development and agricultural preserve or open space land, lots directly abutting these proper-ties should be larger than minimum permitted in the Specific Plan. For planned developments, buffered areas should be provided. This will allow larger rear yard or side yard setbacks to provide a greater distance between structures and the open space properties. Larger lots should also be created where there are streams or creeks on the propert}J. Tht calculation of net lot area may include the, land within the creek setback. However, th-C..'t minimum area for home and accessory building areas shall be 30,000 squar%...JC� feet. 9 North Gate,Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, I991 Large lots may also be required when a geologic reportindicates the presence of an earthquake fault and specifies a distance requirement for the, ime zone. The Land in the seismic zone can be calculated in net lot area, but no habitable structures can be constructed in this area. Environmentally sensitive areas, -creeks, streams, seismic zones and slopes greater than 15%5 are identified in Figure 2. Permitted land uses should-encourage.the continuance of equestrian and agricultural activities, for as long as the properly owners desire, and should protect tie surrounding open space and agricultural preserve..- land. Equestrian uses should remain under an agricultural zoning designation, A-2, General :Agriculture, which requires a minimum lot size of five acres. Equestrian uses and-facilities could be designated in a P-1, Planned Development, provided that no more than 2 .horses are kept-for every 40,000 square feet of lot area.. No exceptions should be made to allow larger scale equestrian facilities, or more horses than are permitted in R-40, Single Family Residential zones. This plan adopts.some standards from the City of Walnut Creek. All new construction will have to comply with the City's 25 foot height Limit, and any requests to remove trees will be subject to 'the provisions of the City's Tree Preservation Ordinance. New development and additions to existing structures will be reviewed by a member of the County staff and a member of the.. County staff to assure consistency with the Specific Plan. 10 • ,., _ �.' �• fIT r �1jr,.T �tti/ oilaim tie j i�t i tr Its PQ LAI pin" � ol: ��'��Mrr•rl.ISR •—.,�—�.�,_�, iiltd,":� ���'��'' ire MIL ► . ''' . *�.�. i/tri ,rMEN A W;rARAA �, ,� •�- ebb 1 � ago Jill . Ran �� � li x xaTw t�Iil•Sl lila Ab .���t ixt`4'i`caSr'arir�'ir4x�x rac4' NX �, •/r.�}'', #.�r►_= `� _�. man IBM � zTTTaj oil 0 ���� x as •r' • t, t 1 i 1 +'Y;Y'•'Jar: :Y.�: '"� _ •, irxOrl .. .. •/1� �r � � w � s I l'l 1. • 1110 rs w NORTH GATE Deveiopment A w i w . + + 2 ''�4� ��,► �=jam: �. ...ar�� t :� ,fit wi•w Fit mow ltlAd .'� ��� tic 2 � � 1 a.M�' ♦��. MIME URKV.A WOW. .[-M— M W zr 'loj V.Ad from to or,IV 40m 10 f, wo ieAli 40 op Jo lk 2�t lop 40 -~ ,y1e•ti� i +I i .a .• 111/4(Wt'dba1�► r � � • • . •• •- 6 40 • r i • s • ._ �1f 2 y. r • North Gate SPe*c0c Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 Proposed Land Uses North Gate Specific Plan Acres Single Family Residential 73 Medium Density (3-4.9 du/net ac) Single Family Residential 26 Low Density (1-2.9 du/net ac) Single Family Residential 2 9 3 Very Low Density (D-0.9 du/net ac) Single Family Residential 22 Very Low Density-lUllside, (0-0.67 du/net ac) Hillside Open Space 27 (0.1 du/net ac) Agricultural Lands 6 Public Open Space 60 TOTAL ACRES 507 13 North Gate Sped,fic Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 Land Use Categories Figure 3 shows the land -uses in the Specific Plan area. A description of these categories is listed below. Single Family Reside Medium-This designation is assigned to the land in the northwestern corner of the Specific Plan area. Located within the City of Walnut Creek, most of this area has been developed with single-family suburban-type homes with few vacant Lots remaining for infill housing. The County's clustered residential/equestrian project was developed under this designation. The minimum lot size within this area is 12,000 square feet. Single Family Residential, Low - This designation is assigned to the rest of the land in the northwestern corner of the.Specific Plan area within the pity's jurisdiction. This area has also been'developed with single family suburban-type homes with view vacant lots remaining for in housing. The minimum lot size in this section is 2Q,000 square feet. Single Family Residential, Very Low -This land.use designation is assigned to-those properties in.the Specific Plan area under private ownership with slopes less than 15%. The minimum lot size is 40,000 square feet except with.a planned development.in which case the minimum lot size can be reduced to 30,000 square feet. Single Family Residential, Very Law-Hillside -.Assigned to land with slopes greater than 15%. Iefinimum lot size for new development is 65,000 square feet. Hillside Open Space - Assigned to land with slopes 26% or greater. Development is permitted on these properties at a density of one dwelling unit per ten acres. Density the equivalent of 0.1 dwelling unit per acre can be transferred to other portions of the project site in a Planned Development_ Agricultural Lands - This property adjacent to the Diablo Foothills Regional Pare is designated "Agricultural Lands" on the County's General Plan. The, City of Walnut Creek is currently negotiating the purchase of this property for public open space. Public Open Space - This designation has been assigned to the Pine Creek Detention Basin, the, City's pari:land along Trails End Drive, and the City's recent acquisitions to Shell Ridge Open Space at the south end of the Specific Plan area off Castle, Rack Road. While the detention basin will function primarily as a flood control facility, it will also be.used as a pari:for passive recreational activities. 14 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 Zoning Unincorporated property can be, rezoned and subdivided consistent with the Specific Plan-land use '"+X:� ory at a density within the designated land use range. The ultimate density of the site.--4;76 ke faults, significant will be determined after natural features such as slopes, cree�ks, earthqua trees and other factors are considered in the site plan. Single-familyresidential zoninq designations consistent with tile Specific Plan are R-40 (40,000 ID square f=+), P.-55 (6.":i,000 square, feet), R-100 k100,000 square feetj and P.80-1, Planned Development. A.I. General Agriculture, the current zoning for most of the properties, is recommended for those parcels whose owners N&ish to maintain long-term equestrian.and agricultural uses. The five acre minimum lot size under this zoning standard allows more -space for these activities. P-1, Planned Development, would provide the greatest flexibility for propert-�r owners in the,area 0 is with Large parcels. This zoning designatLon recommended for -those property owners who r wish to "sfer densities r development from steeper sloped areas, or other environmentally sensitive lands. Minimum lot sizes would be 30,000 square feet. This will permit the property owners flexibility with design and siting of structures, and will allow the County or the City to set specific development standards and use regulations for the development. Property owners with properties not constrained by environmentally sensitive features who wish to develop under the P-1, Planned Development, zoning designation may do so under certain conditions. In exchancre, for consideration of lots as small as 30,000 square feet, developers would have to provide other amenities such as open space, common areas for equestrian facilities, or other recreational facilities, or common areas for gardens, for example. Owners of six or more acres, presently zoned A-2 (General Agriculture) can apply for R-40'zonincr on one or more acres while still retaining the A-2 (General Agriculture) zoning on the remaining parcel provided it is at least five acres.. Alternatively, the entire site can be zoned to a P-1 (Planned Unit Development) zoninatD designation. Although minimum lot sizes under the P-1, Planne�d Development, zonincr designation could be Z"; as small as 30,000 square feet, overall density on the parcel would not exceed the maximum permitted under the Specific Plan land use category. Property in the Cit}' of Walnut Creek- shall be processed under the requirements of the single family residential zoning designation currently assigned to thx..1. parcel. Use permit applications for property in the:%. City or County should be required to comply with the uses specified 'in this Plan. Additionally, all development applications in the unincorporated.W North Gate Spedfic Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors lune 25, 1991 areas shall receive the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator, for conformance with the Specific Plan, prior to the issuance of building permits. Allowable Land Uses within the Specific'Plan Area Land uses within the Specific Plan area will be limited to residential, agricultural, equestrian, recreational, and open space uses. Any interpretation of these Land uses will be made by either the pity or County Pl.. ffinng Commission, depending on the location of the.project, after consultation with both jurisdictions. City of Walnut Creek Land Uses within the City of Walnut Creek's boundaries, existing at the time of adoption of this Specific Plan, shall allow only those permitted in the R-12 and R-20 Single-Family Residential coning districts. Should the City annex any of the County land within the Specific Plan boundaries, land uses on those properties shall comply with the provisions of this Specific Plan. Contra Costa County Land uses in Contra Costa County, the unincorporated part of the Specific Plan area, shall bt restricted to the uses allowed in R-40, R-65, R-100, P-1 or A-2, except where those uses conflict with the provisions stated below. Permitted Lund Uses The land uses which are permitted as a matter of right are: Single family dwellings, accessory structures, and auxiliary uses. • Large family day care homes. • Public operated parks and recreation facilities. • Private gre,,=hnho uses, gardens and orchards. • The raising of poultry, rabbits, and other animals where such animals are primarily for the use of residents of the premises upon which such animals 16 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 are kept and not for resale or distribution. • The keeping of Livestock, per the underlying zoning designation. • Publicly owned buildings and structures,, Conditionalb? Permitted Uses The followinaCP ups are permitted with approval of the county Zoning Administrator subject to certain conditions: Home Occupations. • Commercial Greenhouses. • Second Family Dwelling Units. • Child Care Centers. • Horse riding academies, horse riding instruction and commercial stables. • Kennels_ Prohibited Uses V-Jhile the following uses may be conditionally permitted in the County's single-family residential or agricultural zoning districts, they are not considered appropriate uses in the Specific Plan area. • Second Family Units greater than 1000 square. feet in'sizt. • Medical and dental offices. Churches and religious institutions. Private schools. 41 Commercial nurseries. 0 Commercial radio-television receiving and transmitting facilities. 17 North Gate Specific Plan. Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 • Hospi eleemosynary and philanthropic institutions and Convalescent homes. Development RegulaEions Horne Designs: New home designs shall blend in with the semi-rural character of the area. Buildings on hillsides should complement the topography of the site. Exterior building materials of wood, wood shingles, and brick.are preferred and exterior colors should be in earth tone colors. Bright colors should be avoided. Non-Residential Structures: Agricultural and equestrian structures must comply with the, development standards of the A-27 General Agriculture., zoning district. Placement of Structures: In an effort to enhance the visual character of the area, all new homes built adjacent to North Gate and Castle Rock Roads must face these roadways. Homes shall be single story, no higher than 20 feet, with required front yard setbacks of 40 feet from the edge-of dight-o f-way, where possible_ Minimum lot sizes for these homes shall be 40,000 square feet. Hillside Properties*- No structures are permitted on slopes 26% or greater. However, small agriclutural- related-structures may be built on lands with slopes greater than 26% by filing a Request for Exception from the requirements established by this plan. The County Community Development Director may approve. the Request if the following findings can be made: 1) Any new structure shall be non-commercial in nature. 2) Structures shall not be more than 10 feet in height. 3) Any development application shall avoid significant grading and conform with the existing topography of the site. 4) Landscaping may be required to soften the visual impact of any new structure. Limited development is permitted on slopes between 15% and 26% with a larger minimum lot size. This density may also be transferred to a flatter portion of the site. Height: The height limit for all n4I5..w residential structures shall be two stories, no higher than '.25 feet. New homes fronting North Gate.and Castle Rock Roads shall beone-story, no higher than 20 feet. Non- residential structures shall comply with height limits specified in thc,.11 assigned zoning districts. North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Jane 25, 1991 Front Yard Fencing: New fencing shall not be more than three feet is height at the front property boundary, and or within the front yard setback. Fencing shall be an open-rail design, as shown in Figure, 416 Fences higher than three feet may be permitted upon approval from the County Community Development Director by filiqcr a Request for Exception if the following findings can be made: 1) The fence is needed to enclose livestock, including horses (not doffs, cats or other domestic animals), and Z) The fence shall comply with the required open rail design, with wire meshing between the rails, if desired. Rear/Side Yard.Fencing: Solid board fencing and walls along side and rear property boundaries are to be discouraged_ To minimize the visual impacts of perimeter lot fencing, fencing on slopes greater than 151 shall be open wire or open rail. Fencing along property boundaries between the agricultural preserve land is permitted to be barbed wire to keep grazing animals from wandering into residential areas. Landscaping: New landscaping shall emphasize drought resistent, native plant material. Seismic Setback: Any development within the Alquist-Priolo seismic study area will be required to submit a geologic report. No habitable structures are permitted to be located within the seismic setback- fault etbackfault zone as recommended in the geologic report. The land within the seismic setback area can be calculated as net lot area, provided that the remaining lot area has sufficient space for nein construction, accessory structures, and all applicable setback and lot coverage requirements. Creek Setbacks: For purposes of this Specific Plan, Natural Watercourses are identified on Figure and are defined under Section 914-4.402 (Protection of Natural Watercourses)of the County ordinance Code. New structures shall provide at least a 50 foot minimum setback. Applications for residential development shall be required to provide, as part of the application submittal, a creek preservation and enhancement plan, which outlines the methods of protecting and enhancing this resource. This plan shall include, at a minimum, re-vegetation of the creeks with native riparian vegetation from local seed stock_. Under conventional zoaina, allov;? the creed: setback:to be counted towards a new lot's minimum lot size. However, when located along creeA;.s, the.usable area of a new parcel.shall not be less than 30,000 square feet and shall not include the creed: setback. Tree Preservation: Any proposals for the removal of trees, or for construction or radin�near si=nificant trees, will be consistent with the provisions of the City of Walnut Creek's Tree.P=resenratjon Ordinance. Protection of Property Rights: To protect the rights of property owners with agricultural or equestrian facilities, neve home buyers should be notified that these activities exist in the area, and that there are certain impacts, that some people may find objectionable, associated with these activities. Neve 19 LLI ci CD 0. L.. C.) U. AM �r .ww.•. ••..11•.• • s.•• cu Niv ul di'r'}�.rx�"�i i :SZSir •L X11.i'" S••"V i❖i sY •..tw..� •i.�iii•lii•• :�a`if. i ♦,rr `%�•• ...........l �w r�^} V `I ter•�r•i::: iiTi.i:.ii: �Y i.ism•�• i =t i f l.i•ri• ♦ it•Y.... 20 NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN.--FIGURE 5 Natural W ate rco u cses In tai o cth Gate Cad I dM � ♦ a.11ls III IM II • •r � i M y w ; U named CD401 ...60,0111 111 o 0 Stabl= .9= (un) 0 Detention Basi . MAI TJnnamed �-- CCC CCC Su lu CCC er Canyon +Cre it Pine Creed- yo Del C - EL � r UnIlamc] d r # • r Unnamcd " Pine Creed: ,r _ t 01 Lialc Pine Teek 21 5 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25,, 1991 homeowners will acknowledge the right of adjacent property owners to continue those uses by signing a document to this effect which will be recorded along with the deed. Protection of A,gricuitural and Open Space Lands; To protect the agricultural preserve and open space lands, new Lots created adjacent to.these areas shall be Larger than 4.0,000 square feet. Dwellings shall be set back from the adjoining property boundary at least 60 feet. Protection of EquestrianlAgriculturat Uses and Facilities: Buffers are required between residential, . equestrian or agricultural development. The rear or side yard setback adjacent to these facilities should exceed the required distance specified in the R-40 zone. Distances between barns and riding arenas should be taken.into consideration when siting structures. Grading: Grading should be minimized in the Specific Pian area, particularly on hillsides and along natural creeks. Public Utilities: All utilities must be placed underground. New residential development shall be connected to public sewers and the public water supply. All new residential development shall also provide on-site storm drainage, and shall pay a fee for off-site drainage improvements, if required. Remodeling and Additions to Existing Structures; To the extent feasible, permits for remodeling shall be in conformity with the goals and objectives of this plan pertaining to the heights of nein structures and setbacks. The County Permit Assistance.Counter staff shall review all remodeling permits for conformity with the intent of this plan. Nor%h Gate Sped,fic Plan Contra Costa County Berard of'Supervisors June 25, 1991 Traffic and Circulation North Gate Road Improvements: North Gate Road should be improved to a right-of-way width of 60 feet. This width will accommodate two 12 foot travel Lanes, bicycle lanes, pedestrian paths, equestrian ft-ails, and a landscaping strip (see Figure 6). Applicants who develop properties along North Gate Road will be required to dedicate land for this right-of-way and construct all the improvements, or pay an in-Lieu fee equal to the estimated cost of the improvements,-as a condition of project approval. Castle Rock Road I'mprovements: The right-of-way width for Castle Rocks- Road will be, a minimum of 40 feet. This width will accommodate two 12 foot wide travel lanes and two four foot wide bike lanes. The adequacy of the right-of-way will be reviewed on a prof ect-by-project basis. The County may require aright-of-way width up to a maximum of 60 feet for the protection of significant trees and creeks (see Figure 7). City and County Public works and Community Development staff shall coordinate reviews of any future proposals which .may affect the Castle Rock Road right-of-way or improvements to that road. Applicants who develop properties along Castle Rock Road will be required to dedicate land for this right-of-way and construct all improvements as a condition of prof e t approval. Recreaflonal Traits (see Figure 8) Pedestrian Paths: Pedestrian paths along North Gate and Castle, Rock Roads shall be constructed with the same materials as the travel lane. No concrete sidewalks shall be installed along North Gate and Castle Rock Roads. Bicycle: New bicycle trails are proposed along North Gate and Castle Rock Roads and through the Pine Cree6k- Detention Basin. Equestrian: New equestrian trails are proposed along North Gate Road to connect to existing trails along the northern Specific Plan boundary and Mount Diablo State, Pari;. A tail is also proposed through the County's surplus land, and the Pine Creek Detention Basin connecting to the trail along Castle Rock Road. 23 • I • CD • LO co 1 p � booze it 4 CD 4� cla CJS dO000 �-� �- a " $ c o ' 3 f CD • • fir►dorool 40-01 � • t" ' • On tJ 0 . s ' apoo avow, '00— � G r • c� o c c 0 a m ' 1 ` POP LOS Y 0 O O � I '„i fl- -? C..) �Y L:— � � r O ? .• It ..- -� 00- CG .•— -�, eta � O &WOO LO dIP tl� O 0 Ln C44. 0 CD b-00. CMV 0) C. CL- U CD dopool CD 0000, 0-04 un to CD %Opp CD C� 1 C-4 400. WOW- CD CD IC) 400 boo, -000, CD ergo- %001 W 1, doo- 0000- c4o CD ca Cl) Alool Coll Lo !��r .0000 C:l 400, 400� iroo. 0 'Oo. C) L) C4G Cid - olool, dw 0000, O dp i NORTH �ATF SPECIFIC PLAN--FIGURE 8 Planned Recreation Facilities and Trails t Now a FEE .wt . ■ 17 "• BourzLu y • t • • P Putie Creek Park I woo CD • II i • • L�r • r i`! :•• • 0 0) ..,.Y wr�r on" Ift aft 40, " Detention BC�r'� P I E/B P IB .- • s •�►. qwkm Lmd • • ar P/EIB - BL ' .� Mt Dia b to Park Sndl Ridge .1 opcm pacx �•�i i i Y'�t� r • r«i.•S rNew SlcQng Area s«� e•.tiff•� / ExL z Park • owls. A IL CT • 446 P f �;} •�=�--. Walnut rrcek fro s&d Trak .•1► G--�S pace . Nke TrcO AL B . E Equricn Trck Peaezi�Trc O 1 rail L/X,1T t2*an S a=S dU:27Z tir 1 26 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board o,f Supervisors June 25, I991 . Property Owned by the County County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Surplus* Property: The Flood Control District is required by lawAo. recover the costs of purchasing this land. The Flood Control District intends not to offer this land for.sale for at Least two years from the date of adoption of this Specific'Plan. However, because of the need to provide flood control projects in this and other -parts of the bounty, :the Flood Control District may need to sell the. site to generate needed capital to fund the construction of these projects. with this in mind, tht preferred use for this property is for public open space. To that end, public agencies including the City, the County, East Bay Regional Park-- District (EBRPD) or others, are encuraged to aggressively -pursue the purchase of this property for public open space. Potential funding sources include, but are not Limited to, County park dedication funds, Walnut Creek open space monies, or EBRPD bond Measure, AA funds. If it is not possible.to acquire the,entire site for public open space, then priority should be given to purchasing a 200 foot wide agricultural buffer along the southern boundary of the site. This buffer will provide protection between the agricultural preserve lands located just south of the.site and outside the Specific Plan boundary and any -new residential development which may occur on the remainder of the site to the north. If, however, at the end of two years, acquisition of the site, for public open space, is not being pursued, then the property may be sold and subdivided according to the following conditions: I) A development application may be. submitted for up to 34 sin�le- familylots which inicudes approximately 25 percent of open space. Residential Lots -may be as small as 30,000 square feet to provide open space, which is described below. 2.) The open space areas will bc used for a multipurpose staffing area with approximately 40 paring spaces; anew egestrian trail would be constructed and connect with the existing trail, which traverses the Pine Creed Detention Basin; and for the protection of the existing creed: and riparian habitat located in the southwest corner of the site. The precise location and alignment of these public open space amenities will be determined during development of a 27 C North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 . site plan and the environmental review process, and shall be agreed to by City and County staff prior to approval of any development application. Peine Creek Detention Basin: The primary purpose of the detention basin is flood control. Passive recreational activities are permitted in this area, as well as the construction of a new equestrian trail. Parcel at the Northwest Corner of Specific Plan Area: This parcel is owned by the County Flood Control District. It is proposed that a landscaping plan be developed and implemented by the County. toric Preservation James T. Walker House: The James T. Walker house, located on North Gate Road, has been identified as having historic significance. .All efforts shall be made to preserve this structure and the surrounding grounds. Any proposed additions or alterations should be 'reviewed by the Contra Costa County Historical.Society or the Walnut Creek Historical Preservation Society. North Gate Improvement Association Reservoir: This reservoir, which is located on the eastern boundary of the Specific Plan area, has been identified as being an important private water source. The. reservoir is also a valuable visual amenity and, for these reasons, should be protected and maintained. 28 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 2.5, 1991 til. PLAN IMPLEMENTATION Plan implementation will focus on review of development applications and the fulfillment of plan goals and policies through conditions of development approvals. Nonconforming Land Uses, Lot Sizes or Structures Some land uses, lot, sizes ar Stru%^Aures which Presently exist in the planning area may be inconsistent with the requirements proposed in the Specific Plan. These are considered legal, noncoafor=' g,uses and the City or the County will0te.these uses to continue If a property Permi .A. owner has a legal nonconforming or structure and wishes to expand or change, that use or structure, the owner must apply for a conditional use permit or variance from either the. City or the County, depending upon where the property is located. This will permit the continuation or expansion of the use subject to some,conditions and a finding that such expansion or structural alteration-is necessary to protect a property right and will not impair the character of the area. If a legal, nonconforming building is destroyed and if the cost of the reconstruction is less than 50% (fifty percent) of the total building value after reconstruction, the destroyed building may be.. reconstructed as it previously existed. All illegal, nonconforming land uses and structures will be abated by the City or the County. An illegal nonconfolI'Mg use is one that was never lawfully established under either County or 0 City regulations and operates in violation of either building or zoning regulations since -its r.11 establishment. Lot sizes* may also be nonconforming if the lot does not contain the area, width and fronta.gre required by the designated zoning district. Provided such lot was not created in violation of any regardless previous zoning ordinance the lot size is recognized as a legal, nonconfoll iliacr lot recra.3 t:) 4-.) Zr of size. Any lot may be developed for any use permitted in that zone even though such lot does not contain the area,, width or frontage as required. Applicants who wish to develop and cannot meet the requirements of the Specific Plan may apply for a variance. Abatement of a nonconforming use or structure by the City or Count}� 'is also permissible where It:)the use constitutes a public nuisance. For purposes of clarity, the.. City of Walnut Creed: will have, jurisdiction within the, Cite limits and Contra Costa County will have jurisdiction beyond the. city limits. ?9,wow North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 Exceptions to.Requirements The Specific Plan sets forth requirements which allow for future development M* the, area. To minimize impacts between residentiat and non-residential -uses, conditions such as open space and landscaped buffers, rear and side yard setbacks, setbacks from environmentally sensitive areas maximum building height or lot coverag 1019119,r7 ,e will be required to develop properties within the Specific Plan. Ire certain situations, a property owner may not be able to develop the property consistent with ail the land use regulations in this Plan. While no exceptions or variances shall b e granted to create 'lots smaller than the minimum Specified in the Specific Plan land use categories, exceptions to some of the development.requirements may be granted to the property owner or developer subject to certain findings. The applicant shall demonstrate undue hardship as a result of the application of the regulations and the City or County shallbe required to make the following finding: due to the circumstances applicable to the subjectproperty, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the regulations contained in the,North Gate Area Specific Plan deprives the property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity ty and zone in which the subject property is located. The, City and County shall have the authority to "impose any other conditions which the Jurisdiction deems appropriate to muumize the impact of the development as proposed.. Joint Review or Planned Development Applications MI applications for subdivisions and land use permits within the Specific Plan area shall be referred by the agency which receives the application to the other jurisdiction's planning staff for review and comment. All review comments shall be considered by the approving agency. Anyinterpretation of the types of land uses and whether these uses are permitted as a matter of right, conditionally permitted or prohibited shall be made by either the City's or the County's Planning Commission, depending upon the location of the project, after consultation with the other jurisdiction. In the event that the recommendations of one jurisdiction conflicts with the recommendations of the other jurisdiction, all reasonable efforts shall be made to resolve the outstanding issues. The Joint�itylCountyPlanning Committee, comprised of two VTainut Creek- t:) . City Councilmembers, and two County Board of Supervisors, shall be consulttd for a final recommendation. Because the adopted Specific Plan seeks to reconcile any conflicts betweechn the two jurisdictions' planning documents and obje�ctives, the possibility of disagretment over applications should bt 4- minimal. 30 North Gate Specific Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25, 1991 General and Specific Plan Amendments Both General and Specific Plans may be amended once adapted,, The Specific Plan attempts to clearly define how development will occur in-the planning area. Once adopted, it is the intent of both the City and the County that the Specific Plan objectives be maintained. If a General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element is proposed within the planning area or within the adjacent agricultural preserve lands by either jurisdiction, it shall not be approved without an opportunity for the other jurisdiction to review, comment and issue a recommendation to the legislative body of the jurisdiction with authority to approve this proposed General Plan Amendment. Once either General Plan is amended, however, the Specific Plan must be amended in order to remain consistent with the County and City General Plans as required- by state law. The Specific Plan may be amended as often as deemed necessary by the City and the County., Affects of Proposed Projects California law requires that no tentative subdivision map be approved and that no zoning C� ordinance amendments be adopted unless .they are consistent with an adopted specific plan. All proposed subdivisions and other planning entitlements shall be reviewed for consistency with the North Gate Specific Plan policy and design guidelines. Subdivision approval prior to the adoption of this Plan is generally exempt from the Plan policiesfor purposes of recordinor1:) a final map or parcel map. However, subsequent structuraland orradincr proposals are subject to review for compliance with the design provisions of this Specific t:) Plan. Equestrian Staging Area As noted in the Specific Plan, an equestrian staging area is proposed on a portion of the County's surplus land that is located along North Gate. Road. It is the recommendation of this Specific Plan that a committee be formed consisting of representatives from the follow agencies: the City of Walnut Creek, Contra Costa County, the East Bay Regional Park,-District and the California Department of Parks and Recreation. This committee will be assigned the task of studying the concept of the,equestrian staging area including design guidelines, construction and maintenance responsibilities and costs. 31 North Gate Sped, C Plan Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors June 25,, 1991 •MU %West Jurisdicfionai AdopEion or Pertinent Ordinances In order.to implement the Specific Plan, it is anticipated that the City will adopt the provisions of the County's Creek- Preservation Ordinance. In addition, the County will adopt the-provisions of the City of Walnut Creek's Tree Preservation Ordinance. It is understood that the adoption of these provisions shall only apply to the North Gate Specific Plan area. Conformity with Measure C Every development proposal shall be reviewed for its compliance with Measure C, to ensure that Measure C standards are not exceeded by additional traffic generated by a proposal. Development Fees Property owners or developers who wish to develop their property shall be required to pay all development-associated fees, 'including traffic mitigation fees, Mt. Diablo Unified School District fees, and area-wide benefit fees., Ing J:cm:ngsp6-10.91 32 EXHIBIT A 'PROPOSED FIRST AMENDMENT NORTH GATE SPECIFIC PLAN (SP#96mOO7) The following changes are to be incorporated into the text of the North Gate. Specific Plan under the amendment: 1. CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED LAND USES, Page. 17, North Gate; Specific Plan Add "Small-Scale Commercial Nurseries " to the bulleted list of permitted uses in the. North Gate Specific Plan area with approval of the County Zoning Administrator subject to certain conditions. 2. PROHIBITED USES, Page 17, North Gate Specific Plan Delete "Commercial Nurseries" from the bulleted list of prohibited uses in the North Gate Specific Plan Area. TAE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF C4NTR4 COSTA Adopted this Order on Tuesday, May 9, 2000, by the following, vote: AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA. UILKEMA, DESAULNIER CANCIAMILLA and GERBER NOES: NONE .A.BSENT: NONE ABSTAIli: N ONE RES OLLTTION N4. 2000/ 2:5 4 SUBJECT: In the Matter of the First Amendment To The North Gate Specific Plan General Plan Amendment -(Merlat Nurser}'} CountyTt File SP'96-0007 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County RESOLVES that: There is filed with this Board and its Clerk a copy of Resolution No-19 -1998 adopted by the Count), Planning Commission which recommends approval of the.First Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan (County File SP-#96-0007)& On Tuesday, May 9, 2000 the Board held a public hearing on said First Amendment discussed by the County Plannin j Commission,Resolution No. 19-1998. Notice of said heanncr-was duly given in the manner required by law, The Board at a hearing; called for testimony of a--11-persons interested in this matter. On Tuesday, May 9, 1999, the.Board APPROVED the First Amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan, and directed text chancrts to the Specific Plan as described in the attachment labeled as Exhibit "A", Contact: P. Roche, CDD-+SPD (33-&5,-1242) I hereby cerdt,ttiat fnis is a true and correct coT) of A 64cc: Co=' unity Development Department an action en andle'n=ed on-the tleos of the a, %' CAO Board of Supervisors an the clata.shown. County Counsel Amsted: av 9, 2oon City of Walnut Creek Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the Board PR of Supervisors and Cmmry Atimi-nistrator Morthgamspamend.res By: 44L.,t000 Dep Ty rk Corn m u n ityDennis M.Barry,AICP Development Contra Commun iry Development Director Department Costa County Administration Building County 4 651 Pine Street ,�;,•L� �o.�� 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, California 94553-0095 Phone: 'Y T vti/ (925) 335-1210 c6i DATE: June 6, 2005 NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the"Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended to date,this is to advise you that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: The project involves two separate amendments to the North Gate Specific Plan.The first amendment (County File# SP04-000 1)is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would include limited winemaking or small winery as a conditional use within the Specific Plan area. The second amendment (County File # SP050001) is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that seeks to clarify the maximum residential building height requirements as they are stated in the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan area extends from the intersection of North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road south to the public parklands and then east to the City of Walnut Creek's sphere of influence boundary. The City of Walnut Creek lies west of the Specific Plan area. Public Comment Period-The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to 5:OOP.M.,June27,2005. Any comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address: John Oborne Community Development Department Contra Costa County 651 Pine' Street, North Wing, 4th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 tj Office Hours Nondal� - Friday- 8:00 a.m. -5:00 p.m. �fTi�� is �!ose�' tn� m�nt!- Itis anticipated that the proposed Negative Declaration will be considered for adoption at a meeting of the County Planning Commission on July 12, 2005. The hearing is anticipated to be held at the McBrien Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Room 107, Martinez. It is expected that the Planning Commision will also conduct a hearing on the application at that same meeting. Jo2i Oborne Planner Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Two Text Amendments to the North Gate Specific Plan • County File: SP#04-0001: A proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would include limited winemaking or small winery as a conditional use within the Specific Plan area. • County File: SP#05-0001: A proposed tett amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that seeks to clarify the 2.5-foot maximum residential building height requirements as they are stated in the Specific Plan 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County, Community Development Department Administrative Building 651 Pine Street 4`h Floor—North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-1295 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: John Oborne,Planner Community Development Department Administrative Building 651 Pine Street 2"d Floor—North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-1&'2095 (925) 335-1207 4. Project Location: The North Gate area consists of approximately 507 acres and lies within the jurisdictions of the City of Walnut Creek and Contra Costa County. The North Gate area is accessed from Ygnacio Valley Road, which is a major arterial extending from Interstate 680. Figure 1 (attached) is a vicinity map of the North Gate Specific Plan area. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Contra Costa County Administrative Building 651 Pine Street 2°d Floor—North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-1295 6. General Plan Designation: The existing County General Plan designations for the North Gate area include: Single Family Residential - Medium Density (SM), Single Family Residential - Low Density (SL')', Single Family Residential-Very Low Density (SV),Agricultural Lands (AL.), and Open Space (OS). 7. Zoning: North Gate has the following zoning districts within its borders: Single Family Residential (R-40), Planned Unit Development (P-1), General Am- cultural (A-2..) and Agncultura] Preserve District (A-4). 8. Description of Project: The purpose of this initial study is to determine the potential environmental impacts of two separate amendments to the North Gate Specific Plan. The projects are being considered under the same initial study for the sake of efficiency. The first amendment (County File.- SP#04-0001) is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would include limited winemaking or small winery as a conditional use within the Specific Plan area. The second amendment (County File: SP#OS-0001) is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that seeks to clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirements as they are stated in the Specific Plan. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Mount Diablo State Park, Diablo Foothills Regional Park, and the Lime Ridge and Shell Ridge Open Space areas comprise some of the land uses surrounding the North Gate area. These parks and open space areas are in close proximity to North Gate and contribute to the physical setting of the area. Approximately 2000 acres located directly east of the Specific Plan area are designated for agricultural and open space uses. 10. Approvals: None 11. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g. permits, financing, approval, or participation agreement): • City of Walnut Creek J Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated bv the checklist on the following pages. _ Aesthetics _ Agricultural Resources _ Air Quality _ Biological Resources _ Cultural Resources _ Geology/Soils _ Hazards&Hazardous Materials _ Hydrology/Water Quality _ Land Use/Planning _ Mineral Resources _ Noise _ Population/Housing _ Public Services _ Recreation _ Transportation/Traffic _ Utilities/Service Systems _ Mandatory Findings of Significance 4 DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: X— 1 find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment., there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one effect (1)has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (12) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on f t impact"attached sheets, if the ef ect is a "potentially significan or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment., there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Cot—, Signature Date John Oborne Project Planner Contra Costa County Community Development Department SOURCES In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation, the following references (which are a 'lable for review at the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street 2nd available Floor-North Wing, Martinez,) were consulted: I) Contra Costa County General Plan, (2005-?020) 2) Title 8,Planning and Zoning Ordinance, Contra Costa County 3) North Gate Specific Plan, Adopted by the Board of Supervisors,,.-June 25., 1991, and amended, May 20. 2000 1 4) Community Development Department Digital Map Library �) Project Description 6) Bay Area Air Quality Management District CEQA Guidelines, 1999 7) State of California, Department of Conservation Important Farmland Map,, 1?000 A.W 8) Earthquake Fault Zone Map. 1982 USGS Quad. 9) 2,002 Hazardous Waste and Substance Sites (Cortese) List—State of California 10) City of Walnut Creek Municipal Code, Section Code 10-?.1.303 (A) (38) (a) 6 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than No Significant Mitigation Significant Impact %-W Impact Incorporated Impact I. AESTHETICS—Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Source: 1) X b. Substantially darnaae scenic resources', including but 4-? not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (Source: I-) X C. Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings`? (Sources: 1, X 5112) d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the X area?(Sources: 5) Project#1 -- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Through A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winernakina/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. No direct physical construction would result from the adoption of the text amendment to the Specific Plan. Although future development of a limited winemaking/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Spec*fic Plan area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment there is no substantial evidence that the text amendment would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area of aesthetic impacts. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY:No Impact Project #2 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would clarify the 25-foot maximum residential building height requirements as they are stated in the Plan. The text amendment does not apply to lots that are fronting North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road. It does not allow a greater residential building height than what was allowed before the amendment. The amendment, in accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's Municipal Code, states that residential building height may be increased by four feet(to a maximum of 29 feet) if the roof pitch meets certain criteria. Since this height allowance has always been recognized by the County, and building permits have been approved with it since the inception of the plan in 1991, there are no new aesthetics impacts as a result of this Specific Plan amendment. 7 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? (Source: I., 8) X b. Conflict with existing zoninc, for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act Contract?(Sources: 1,2) X c. Involve other changes in the existing enviromnent, which due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Sources: 1. 8) X Pro iking/Winery Under A Project#1 — Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited W*nema Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No linpact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow lirru'ted I is regulatory in nature and does not confer winerriaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It ' future development of a limited winernaking/winery any entitlement or approval of development. Although f in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size... or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment there is no substantial evidence that the text amendment would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area of agricultural resources. In fact,no land in the Specific Plan area qualifies as prime agricultural land and the State of California Department of Conservation Map of Important Farmland has designated all area within the North Gate Specific Plan borders as Urban and Built-Up Land. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification of the 25-foot residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area. No development or physical changes are enabled with this action. The text amendment does not allow development where the current zoninp, and General Plan do not currently allow development. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment., would adversely affect the physical enviroriment in the area of agricultural resources. AIR QUALITY a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? (Sources: 1, 5 X b. Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (Sources: 1, 5) X C. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of tJ Potentially Slu,nificant Potentialiv Uniess Less Than Siunificant Mitidation Sitynificant No Impact hicomorated Impact Impact any criteria pollutant for which the project region is a non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?(Sources: 1, 5)' X d. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations'? (Sources: 1, 5) X e. Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people'? (Source: 5)) _X Project#1-- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited Winernaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use pest. Itis regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winernaking/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment', it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size., or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. The text amendment would not modify the standards for clean air in the Specific Plan area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment there is no substantial evidence that the text amendment would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area of air quality. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project #2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area. No development or physical changes are enabled with this action. The Specific Plan Amendment does not allow development where the current zoning and General Plan do not currently allow development. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment,would adversely affect air quality in the Specific Plan area. TV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES—Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications,, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies., or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?(Sources: 1, 5) X b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies J."_ I regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. J Potentially Significant Potentially unless Less Thais Significant Mitityation Significant No intact Incorporated In3pact Impact Fish and Wildlife Service? (Sources: 1, 5) X c. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Sources: 11., 5 X d Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors., or impede the use of native wildlife nursery X sites'.) (Sources: 1) e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as tree X P policy or ordinance. (I Sources: L.2.) f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservationplan?(Source: 1) X Project#1 -- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/NVinery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winernaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer future development of a limited winemaking/winery any entitlement or approval of development. Although f operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size or characteristics associated with the 1 i prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the-physical environment in the area of biological resources. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project #2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area.No development is proposed,no site is disturbed,and no improvements are required through the proposed action of amendinp, the Specific Plan text. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof will have a significant adverse affect on Biological Resources within the North Gate Specific Plan area. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES—Would the project-. a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5? 10 Potentially Sionificant Potentially Unless Less Than Sluanificant Mitla.adoll SiLynificant No Impact Incorporated Impact Im act (Source: 5) b Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? (Source: 5)) X c. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geological feature? (Sources: -} X d. Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (Source: 5) —X Project#1 — Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winemaking/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text I i amendment it is speculative to anticipate the specific locaflon, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that the text amendment would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the historical, archaeological, or paleontological resources,or human remains in the Specific Plan area. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY:No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area.No development is proposed,no site is disturbed, and no improvements are required through the proposed action of amending the Specific Plan text. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would adversely affect historical, archaeological, or other unique features on a collective or individual basis. Therefore, the text amendment clarifying maximum residential building height would not have a significant adverse affect on cultural resources within the Specific Plan area. V1. GEOLOGY AND SOILS—Would the project: a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including, the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. (Source: 0 X 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? (Source: 1) X 11 Potentially Slvnlflcant Potentially Unless Less Than Sitnificant vlitintion Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction'? (Source: 1) x 4. Landslides'? (Source: 1) X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil'? (Source: 1) X C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse'? (Source: 1) Y d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- B of the Uniform Building Code (1998), creating substantial risks to life or property'? (Source: 1) X e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater`?(Source: 1) X Project#1 — Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/NVinery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winernakin /winer g Y operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Furthermore, thisro osed P P text amendment would not allow development where the current zoning and the General Plan do not currently allow development, therefore it will not increase the exposure ofeo le or structures to P P potentially substantial adverse effects to the geology and soils in the North Gate area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that theJ ro'ect would have an reasonable P y probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area ofeolo and soils. g gy Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project #2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential height requirements within . g q the Specific Plan area. No development is proposed, no site is disturbed, and no improvements are required . P � through the proposed action of amending the Specific Plan text. Currently, The North Gate S ecific Plan . y P Area has areas that are within an Earthquake Fault Zone (fon-nerly known as Al uist Priolo Special Stud q P Y Zone), and as such structures for human occupancy may have further structural requirements in addition to q the proposed design criteria. This proposed amendment would not allow development where the current zoning and General Plan do not currently allow development, therefore it will not increase the exposure of . P people or structures to potentially substantial adverse effects to the geology and soils of North Gate. There 12 Potentially Slanificant Potentlallv unless Less Thaii Sitynificant Mitigation Simi Ficant No Impact Incomorated impact Impact is no evidence to sucrerest that the allowance of 4 feet with a _3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text lnz� amendment would I have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area of geology and soils in the Specific Plan area. V11. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS—Would the project: a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials? (Source: 5) X b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?(Source: 5) X c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed X school? (Source: 5) d. Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65862.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?(Source: 10) X e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing X or working in the project area. (Source: 1) f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip., would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?, (Source: 1) _X g. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuationplan?(Sources: 5) X h. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss., injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (Source: 5) X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winernakinI g/winery as an allowed use under a land use perrn't. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a lirruted wine making/wi nery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text Potentially Siu-nificant Potentially v Unless Less Than Si2nificant Mitigation Sitynificant No Impact Incorporated I nipac t Impact amendment. it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have any reasonable probabilltv of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area of hazards and hazardous materials. Project#2 - Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project #2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch U"_ roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area of hazards and hazardous waste in the Specific Plan area. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY—Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements`?(Source: 1) X b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table(e.g.,the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)?(Source: 5) X c. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? (Source: 5) X d. Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface run-off in a manner that would result in flooding on-or off-site? (Sources: 5) X e. Create or contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff-' (Sources: 5') X f. Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? (Source: 5) X a.n Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation 14 Potentially S I Lyni ficant Potentially Unless Less Than Slulnificant Mitla-ation Signs ficant No Impact Incorporated impact map`? (Sources: 5) X h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures that would impede or redirect flood flows? (Sources: 3) X 1. Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?(Sources: 5-) X j Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (Source: X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Inipact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow lirru'ted winemaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited wine rmking/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size., or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Specific concerns associated with water quality and hydrology for limited winemakiner/winery operation in the North Gate area would be addressed on individual project basis through the land use pe='t application process.Based on a review of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse 1 acts on the physical environment on the hydrology and water quality in the Specific Plan area. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height Project #2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area. The North Gate Specific Plan Area does contain areas,some of which are residential properties that are in the 100-year flood hazard area.There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would adversely affect the physical environment in the area of hydrology and water quality in the Specific Plan area. Ix. LAND USE AND PLANNING—Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community? (Sources: 5) X b. Conflict with anv applicable land use plan, policy., or the regulation of an agency with Jurisdiction over the project (including, but not lirm'ted to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or nutw,atinc, an environmental effect? (Sources: 1, 2"31 X 15 Potentially Si^nificant Potentially Uniess Less Than Significant Mitigation Siunificant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c. Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? (Source: 1) X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Wine making/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited wine making/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. The text amendment would neither result in physically dividing an established community, nor conflict with anv applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan since, as no such plans exist in the North Gate area. A limited winemaking/winery operation is allowed under a land (conditional) use permit in all County agricultural zoning districts. The text amendment would extend this conditional use to similarly zoned properties within the North Gate Specific Plan area, and therefore would remove a conflict between Specific Plan and zoning. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height ht SUMMARY: No Impact The proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan seeks to clarify the 25-foot residential building height requirements for most of the lots in the Plan area. The proposed amendment does nota apply y to lots fronting North Gate Road and Castle Rock Road. There are three places in the North Gate Specific Plan that refer to maximum residential building height. ht. The first place is under Land Use Regulations, page 9, where it states "New homes should be one or two stories, no higher than 25 feet." The second place is under Development Regulations onpag e 18, where it states "The height limit for all new residential structures shall be two stories, no higher than 25 feet. It is the third reference to maximum residential building height that causes the need for this amendment. Under Land Use Regulations, on page 10, the Plan states "All new construction will have to compiv with � the City's 25 foot height limit". The City of Walnut Creek has a different definition of the 25 feet height limit than the County. This difference is not stated in the Plan, which has caused some confusion among some of the residents of North Gate. According to the City's zoning code the maximum residential height allowed is 25 feet, with the provision . that the height may be Increased by four feet if at least 75% of the horizontal roof area maintains a minimum pitch of 3:12 or greater. The County has no such provision in its code. Since the inception of the Plan in 1991 it has been the practice of the County to clear building P errnits for residential structures over 25 feet, to a maximum height of 29 feet, if the plans had the City of Walnut Creek's stamp on them. This is done in recognition of the City"s provision for residential Height. 16 Potentially Significant Potentialiv unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No C� impact Incolporated Impact impact To make the North Gate Specific Plan consistent with itself and to bring it into alignment with County Plan to inc I ude the City�s practice s. staff is recommendini�that the County amend the North Gate Specific PI provision for height by insertin(T an asterisks next to each of the three references noted above with a footnote to read as follows: In accordance with the City of Walnut Creek's definition of building height, crht, n ' height may be increased by four feet in at least 7.5%of the horizontal roof area maintains a rm imurn pitch of 3):12 of(neater. Based on a review of theproposed text amendment there is no substantial evidence that the text amendment would have anv reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on or conflict with existing Specific Plan standards. %-� A X. MINERAL RESOURCES—Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Source: 1) X b. Result in the loss or availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local c7eneral plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? X (Source: I Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Wine ma king/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited is regulatory in nature and does not confer winernaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It * %-.1 any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a luted winernaking/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment I it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the * prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. There are no known nu*neral resources of value to the region or state located within the North Gate Specific Plan area. Based on a is no substantial evidence that the project would have any review of the proposed text amendment, there ' reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment on mineral resources. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the residential building height requirements within the Specific Plan area. There are no known mineral resources of value in the area. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a -3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical envirorn-nent in the area of mineral resources in the Specific Plan area. 17 Potentially Sivniticant Potentially Uniess Less Than Significant Mitigation Siunificant leo Impact Incorporated Impact Im act XI. NOISE—Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies'?(Sources: 5) X b. Exposure of persons to, or generation of, excessive around borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? (Source: 5) X c. A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project'? (Sources: 5) d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project'? (Sources: 5) e. For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?(Source: 1) X f. For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?(Source: S) X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Wine making/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winemakin /wine . g ry operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. A limited wine making/winery operation involves processing of agricultural product, which inherently creates noise, but there is not evidence to suggest that such noise is any greater than noise from existing agricultural ricultural uses within the North Gate area. Specific concerns associated with noise for a limited winemakin /winer operation in the g y P North Gate area would be addressed on . individual project basis through the land use permit application process(e.g. hours of operation, facility location, etc.). Based on a review of thero osed text amendment p p , there is no substantial evidence that it would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment on the noise levels within the Specific Plan area. Project#2 - Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height ht SUMMARY: No Impact 18 Potentially Siunificant Potentially U111ess Less Than Significant Miti^atioll Siunificant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the 25-foot residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in terms of the noise levels in the Specific Plan area. X11. POPULATION AND HOUSING—Would the project: a. Induce substantial population growth in an area. either directly (fol- example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (Source: 5) X b. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source: 5) X C. Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Source: 5) X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winer akin /wine g ry operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Since no development is proposed through the text amendment there is no increase in the demand for housing and text amendment would not result in displacement of housing. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifving Maximum Residential Building Height ht SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification on the 25-foot residential height requirements g within the Specific Plan area. The proposed text amendment will not have an effect on population and . p p housing in the North Gate Specific Plan Area. No development or construction is enabled through the . g amendment. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and I2 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would adversely affect the demand for housing in the Specific Plan area. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical 19 Potentially swilificant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitivation Slunificant No Z4 Ct C� Impact Incorporated In3pact Impact impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities., need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services. (Sources: 5. I Fire Protection'? X P I X ol*ce Protection'? 11. X Schools'? 4. Parks? X 5. Other public facilities? X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winernaking/winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winernaking/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size., or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. The text amendment would not have significant impacts on the service districts or other public facilities within the Specific Plan area. The proposed text amendment does not increase population of housing and therefore could not increase the demand for public services. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification of the 2.5-foot residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area.The North Gate Specific Plan Area is a community with existing services. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would adversely affect the physical environment in terms of service districts or other public facilities within the Specific Plan area. XTV. RECREATION a. Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?(Source: 5) X b. Does the project include recreational facilities or 20 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impac Incorporated lLnpact Impact require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on k-.1 the environment? (Source: 5.) -X Project#1 -Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Wine making/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winernakingiwinery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winemakin g/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use pern-ut process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. The text amendment would not result in an increase in density of residential homes and therefore will not increase the demand for recreational facilities. Project#2 - Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification of the 25-foot residential height requirements I I within the Specific Plan area. The proposed Specific Plan amendment w'11 not result in an increase of density of residential homes and therefore will not increase the demand for recreational facilities. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment there is no substantial evidence that the text amendment would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment in the area recreation. Xv. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC-Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections. (Source: 5) -X b. Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Source: 1, 5) X c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (Sources: 1, 5) X d. Substantially increase hazards due-to a design feature (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or 21 Potentially significant Potentially Unless Less Than Slunificant Mitigation Sipificant No Impact Incorporated Impact I n3pac incompatible uses(e.g. farm equipment)?(Source: 5) X e. Result in inadequate emergency access'.) (Source: 5) X f. Result in inadequate parking capacity?(Sources: 5) X (T Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportationbus turnouts', (I e.c.;. bicycle racks)? (Sources: 1) —X Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking/winery as an allowed use tinder a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winemakinv,/winery operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment., it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. Specific concerns associated with traffic generated by a limited winemaking/winery operation in the North Gate area would be addressed on individual project basis through the land use permit application process. Based on a review of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that the project would have any reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment associated with traffic in the Specific Plan area. Project#2- Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY:No Impact Project #2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification of the 25-foot residential height requirements within the Specific Plan area.North Gate has an established road system to access its residential conununity. There is no change to traffic or transportation being proposed with this project as no development is proposed. The project does not create additional traffic or modify the existing level of service. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a 3 and 12 pitch roof, as clarified under this text amendment, would adversely affect the physical enviromnent associated with traffic in the Specific Plan area. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS—Would the project-. a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Source: 5) X b. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant envirom-nental effects?(Sources: 5) X C. Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (Source: Potentia 1 i v Sivniiicant Potentia l i`, Unless Less Than Si-unificant i'vlitWatiotl Si;nificant No Impact incorporated Impact Impact d. Have sufficient water supplies available serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (Source:5) X e. Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider that serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments'' (Source: ) Y f. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's waste disposal needs`? (Source: 5) X g. Comply with federal, state and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste`? (Source: 1) Project#1 —Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Winemaking/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY:No I nipact Project #1 is a proposed text amendment to the North Gate Specific Plan that would allow limited winemaking%winery as an allowed use under a land use permit. It is regulatory in nature and does not confer any entitlement or approval of development. Although future development of a limited winernakin /wiper g Y operation in the Specific Plan area under the land use permit process may occur as a result of the text amendment, it is speculative to anticipate the specific location, size, or characteristics associated with the prospective development of this newly allowed use in the Specific Plan area. It is noted that in the land use permit process an applicant for a limited winemaking/winery operation will need to demonstrate that there are sufficient water supplies, can meet the wastewater discharge standards, and appropriately address the County's stormwater requirements before the land use permit may be issued. Specific concerns associated . p with utilities and service systems for a limited winemaking/winery operation in the North Gate area would be addressed on individual project basis through the land use permit application process. Based on a review pp of the proposed text amendment, there is no substantial evidence that theprojectj would have an . y reasonable probability of significant adverse impacts on the physical environment associated with utilities and service systems in the Specific Plan area. Project#2 - Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height ht SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2 is a text amendment to provide for a clarification of the 25-foot residential height requirements . g q within the Specific Plan area and it does not modify current existine, utilities and services. There is no b increase in the need to expand the current utilities and services because there is no construction improvements proposed with this project. There is no evidence to suggest that the allowance of 4 feet with a and 12 pitch m . roof, as clarified under this text amy Pyendment, would adversely affect the physical . . . environment associated with utilities and service systems in the Specific Plan area. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the 2 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than SiLTnificant Mitityation Sivnificam No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish and wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustainincy levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal X community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endanizered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory" X b. Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future prod ects)`. c. Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X Project#1—Text Amendment to Specific Plan Allowing Limited Wine making/Winery Under A Land Use Permit SUMMARY: No Impact Project#2-Text Amendment to Specific Plan Clarifying Maximum Residential Building Height SUMMARY: No Impact - �LA�SIFIED THE 'T I ME S `(DT I F_1' 4 4}C3 N-C , 1CAT 1 r SATURDAY.TURDAY. NOVEMBER 51 2005 GE_ F23 AMENDMENT TO THE! NOR'TIK BATE SPECIFIC PLAN..-CLARIFICATION ON MAXtSiIUM RESIDENTIAL BUILDING HOONT RE- MIEMENTS (Coun" NOTICE'OF PUBLIC %.1kr--,SV.W"01)•This is a HEARING=BEFORE THE proposae to amend the A COUNTY North Gate Specific Plan CONTRA COSTA ��Notice BOARD OF SUPERVBMM to;ciat.rifythe -foot max- ON-PLANNING MATTERSimurn residential building available-on Tuesday,No height requirements as WALNUT CREEKiAM vember 15,2005,..at 12:30 they are stated in the p:m.in-Room 108;Admin- Specific Plan. Notice is hereby given Ist ration Building, fi51 that-...on-Thy, Novent- Pine Street,Martinez,,CA, The North Gate Specific ber 15,2006 C.at 1s00 p ul to.,.meet with any.interest- -Plan area extends from in.the County Administra- ed persons In order to.(1) the i ntersection of North tion Building, Board answer questions; (2)re- Gate Road and Castle p Rock Road south to the Chambers,651 Pine Street dares usehearing by the-8aard; public arklands and (Corner of Pine and (3) clarify the issues�be- Escobar Streets Marti• then eas .to`the City of nez;California,the(antra ing considered bx the Walnut Creeks sphere of f Board;and.(4)provide an influence boundary. The Costar County Board o ,opportunity to Identify, proposed Specific Plan Supervisors will conduct i resolve, or narrow *any amendment to the North a public hearing to con- differences which remain Gate Specific Pian would skier the following plan- nen®matter: in dispute. if you.wish-to apply to the unincorpo- attend this meeting with rated territory of the AMENDMENT TO THE staff, please.call Patrick County of Contra Costa, NORTH MATE SPECIFIC Roche,Community Devel• State of California. PLAN� - ALLOW LIMITED opment Department, at WIN,EMAKING/WINERY (925) 335-1242 by 3:00 For the-purposes of cam USE-AS!A CONDITIONALLY pp .m, on Monday., Novem- pliance with the provi- PERMITTED USE (County ber 14, 2005 to-confirm, :sions of-the California AEnct- FIle:sPRO4-OOOi).This is a your�participation. vtronrnentai Quality pproposal to amend the (CEQA),a.Negative Decia- North Gate Specific Pian Date:November 29:2005 ration has-been prepared to allow a limited for this project. winemaking/winery-oper- JOHN SWEETEN,-Clerk of ation,as a conditionally the Board of the Board�of if you challenge this mat- permitted use,.and to es- Supervisor-and'County ter in Court, you may be tablish-the size, location Administrator limited to raising only andproduction threshold those Issues you or requirements for such BY:Katherine Sinclair, someone.-.-vise raised at winemaking/winery o er- Deputy Clerk the-public:hearing-descri- ations In the-North Gate Legal CCT 4141 bed in-the notice,-or in area. Publish November 5,2005 written:correspondence. The North Gate Specific NOTICEOF-PUBLIC Prior-to.the hearing,Com- Pian area extends from HEARING��BEFORETHE munity Development De- the Intersection of North t*►pNTRA�C05TA�t OUNTY De- - staff will be Gate Road and Castle BOARD-OF'SU available on Tuesday,No- Rock Road south to the ONPLANNING-MATTERS vember 15,-20059 at 12:30 blic arkiands and .m. in Room 108,Admi then p WALNUT CREEK-AREA FAtion Building,east to the City of Wainut-Creek`s sphere ofPine Street,Martinez.CA, influence boundary. The Notice Is hereby given to-meet with any interest- proposed Specific Plan that on TueWaY, Nova - ed-per-sons in order to(1) amendment,to.-*the North ber i59 2005.-at.1:10 p.m., answer questions; (2)re- Gate:Specific Plan would in the County,Administra- view the hearing proce- tion Building, Board dures,used by the Board; rapey to the unencorpo Chambers,651 Pine Street rated territory of the (3) clarify the issues be- County of Contra Costa, (Corner of pine and ing considered by the State of California. Escobar Streets), Marti- Board,and,(4)provide an nez.California,the Contra opportunity to Identify, For-the purposes of com- Costa County Board of resolve, or narrow any pliance with the prove- Supervisors will conduct differences which remain sions of the!California En- a public hearing to con: I in dispute. if you wish to vironmental Quality Act sider the following plan• ;attend this meeting.with (CEQA);.a-Negative-Decia- ning matter: staff, please .call John ration,has been prepared Oborne, Community De-, for this project. veloprnent Department, at (925),335-1207�by 3:00, If you challenge this mat- p.m. an Monday, Novem- r ber 14, 2005 to confirm ►ter In Court, you may be limited to raising only; your participation. those Issues you or Date:November 2,-2005 someone else raised at I the public hearing descri- JOHN SWEETEN,Clerk of I bed In the-..,notice, or in the Board of the Board of i written correspondence. Supervisor and.County Prior to the hearing,Com-, Administrator I munity Deveiopment De- BY:Katherine Sinclair, partment staff will be Deputy Clerk Le i l CCT 4142 Publish November 5,2005 } Isabel Burton Kvalvik Alan Carreon Sandra Meyer 579 Pine Creek Rd. WC. Comm .Dev Dept. WC. Comm .Dev Dept. Walnut Creek, CA 94598 P.0. Box 8039 P.O. Box 8039 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Re: FILES #SPO50001 & #SP040001 D:\CD—Tempuser\BoardAgenda\SP050001-LabelsForl 1-1 5-05-Hearing.doc