Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10172007 - D3-B J0r 3 V IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ADOPTED this resolution on August 1,2000 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Gioia, Uilkema, DeSaulnier, Canciamilla,and Gerber NOES: none ABSENT: none ABSTAIN: none RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 SUBJECT: Potential Modifications to the Urban Limit Line) Contra Costa County General Pian Amendment) (GP#960001) ) THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY RESOLVES THAT: . WHEREAS, there is filed with this Board and its Clerk a copy of Resolution No. 7- 2000, adopted by the Contra Costa County Planning Commission, which recommends boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line in the form of an amendment to the Contra Costa County Genera/Plan, 1995-2010, specifically in the following areas: • Crockett • Martinez • Tassajara • Clayton Ranch • Pittsburg • Antioch • Brentwood • Oakley(where County Planning Commission recommended no change) • Veale Tract WHEREAS, the proposed boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line were the subject of a General Plan Amendment Study and Environmental Impact Report("EIR"),which taken together constitute the five (5) year periodic review of the Urban Limit Line as provided for under Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1.018 (a)(5), which is contained in Chapter 82-1 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code, entitled 65/35 Land Preservation Plan (adopted by voter initiative as Measure C in November 1990);and WHEREAS, on July 24, 2000 and thereafter continued to July 25, 2000, the Board held a public hearing on said amendments as discussed by the County Planning Commission Resolution No. 7-2000. Notice of said public hearing was duly given in the manner required by law. The Board, at the public hearing called for testimony of all persons interested in this matter, and 135 persons testified and numerous written comments were submitted in support of and in opposition to the proposed boundary modifications. After nearly 12 hours of testimony was completed,this Board closed the public hearing on July 25, 2000 and declared the intent of this Board to approve a set of boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line, and continued deliberation of the matter to August 1, 2000, and directed staff to prepare findings for consideration and possible adoption; and RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Pagel WHEREAS, with respect to the Brentwood Area (Cowell Ranch Alternative) boundary modification, this Board declared its intent to adopt the "Cowell Ranch Alternative" or the Brentwood Area Proposal (as described in the Staff Report to the County Planning Commission, dated June 20, 2000,therein shown as Figures 10 and 7A, respectively)and continued its closed hearing deliberation to September 12, 2000. In declaring this intent, this Board determined to choose among these two alternatives based upon the potential sale of the Cowell Foundation property to a land trust for permanent open space purposes, excepting the portion of the property to be conveyed to a private land developer. In the event that this Board is not satisfied that such a sale has been contracted, this Board intends to adopt the Brentwood Area"Proposal"modification in a subsequent General Plan Amendment adoption. As a result of this declaration of intent, the Brentwood Area Proposal and Cowell Ranch Alternative are severed from the General Plan Amendment and are not a part of this resolution; and, WHEREAS, with respect to the Pittsburg Area boundary modification, this Board declared its intent to adopt the "Alternative" (as described in the Staff Report to the County Planning Commission, dated June 20, 2000,therein shown as Figure 5B), with the exception of an area west of Bailey Road between the Concord Naval Weapons Station Blast Safety Easement Zone and southern boundary for the city limits of Pittsburg,, and continued its closed hearing deliberation on this matter to September 12, 2000. As a result of this declaration of intent, the Pittsburg Area "Alternative" is to be severed from the General Plan Amendment and is not a part of this resolution; and, WHEREAS, on July 25, 2000, after closing the public hearing, this Board made a finding that this amendment to the General Plan would not have a significant direct or indirect impact on the physical environment and then certified that the EIR, prepared for this amendment to the General Plan, is adequate, complete, and prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA") and State and County CEQA Guidelines;and, WHEREAS, the Board members having fully considered this amendment discussed in Contra Costa County Planning Commission Resolution No. 7-2000, the analysis and recommendations included in the Staff Report to the County Planning Commission, dated June 20, 2000, the Final EIR, and the public testimony and written comments received at or prior to the public hearing, determines to amend the Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 to modify the Urban Limit Line boundary as follows: 1. Crockett Area - The placement of approximately 39 acres (+1-) of unincorporated land area on two sites, which are a portion of the former C&H Property, adjacent to the community of Crockett, south of the town along Crockett Boulevard and east of Interstate 80, outside the Urban Limit Line. The location of the boundary modifications for the two sites in the Crockett area are depicted in Exhibit"A"to this resolution. 2. Martinez Area - The inward movement of the Urban Limit Line boundary for three locations in the Martinez Area: 1) The Martinez Ridge (also known as Franklin Hills) that include the placement of approximately 364 acres (+l-) of ridgeline and slope area, outside the Urban Limit Line, that were acquired for parkland and open space purposes, which are located due west of Alhambra Avenue between State Route 4 and the Carquinez shoreline; 2) The John Muir Historic National Historic Site, located at 4202 Alhambra Avenue, which includes placement of the 9 acre (+/-) land area, comprising the John Muir home site operated as a park and monument by the U.S. National Park Service, outside the Urban Limit Line; and, 3) The Shell Marsh (McNabney Marsh), located east of Interstate 680 and south of the Martinez-Benicia Bridge, which includes placement of approximately 398 acres (+l-) of predominantly wetlands and a portion of hilly grassland outside the Urban Limit Line. The three locations of the boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line in the Martinez area are depicted in Exhibit"B"to this resolution. RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 2 3. T. assaiara Area-The Urban Limit Line in the Tassajara area will be moved inward from its present location as follows: south of the driveway entrance for Tassajara Hills Elementary School along Camino Tassajara the Urban Limit Line boundary will be moved to a location generally aligned along the major ridgeline (running from north-south to the Alameda County line) that functions as a natural watershed between Alamo Creek and Tassajara Creek (also known as the Watershed boundary modification); and, north of driveway entrance to the Tassajara Hills Elementary School along Camino Tassajara, the Urban Limit Line will be moved to a location which is coterminus with the eastern boundary for the Blackhawk community, which is also the Sphere of Influence boundary alternate alignment. This boundary modification would shift approximately 4,026 acres (+/-) to the non- urban side of the Urban Limit Line. The location for the boundary modification to the Urban Limit Line in the Tassajara area is depicted in the Exhibit "C" to this resolution. 4. Clagyton Ranch Area - The Clayton Ranch site, an unincorporated land area of approximately 1,030 acres (+/-), located north of the intersection of Marsh Creek Road and Morgan Territory Road and east of the City of Clayton,which is presently an island of land inside the Urban Limit Line, will be placed outside the Urban Limit Line by removing the boundary line.The location of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification is depicted in Exhibit"D"to this resolution. 5. Antioch Area-The boundary modification originally identified as the "Proposal" (as described in the 6/20/2000 Staff Report to the County Planning Commission) that involves the inward movement of the Urban Limit Line to the southern boundary of the city limits for the City of Antioch, and the western boundary of the city limits for the City of Brentwood. This boundary modification would shift approximately 1,622 acres (+/-) of unincorporated land area to the non-urban side of the Urban Limit Line. The location of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification is depicted in Exhibit"F"to this resolution. 6. Qaklev Area-The boundary modification originally identified as the "Alternate" (as described in the 6/20/20100 Staff Report to the County Planning Commission) that involves the inward movement of the Urban Limit Line in a location east of the City of Oakley along Cypress Road, except that the limits of this boundary modification are Knightsen Avenue to the west, Cypress Road to the north, and Contra Costa Canal to the east. This boundary modification would shift approximately 240 acres (+/-)of unincorporated land area to the non-urban side of the Urban Limit Line. The location of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification near Oakley is depicted in Exhibit"G"to this resolution. 7. Veale Tract Area - The placement of approximately 1,040 acres (+/-) of unincorporated land area known as Veale Tract, located east of Knightsen at the end of Delta Road, to the non-urban side of the Urban Limit Line. The location of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification for Veale Tract is depicted in Exhibit "G"to this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ADOPTS THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. The Board has determined based on the criteria and factors for establishing the Urban Limit Line as set forth under Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1.010, that there is new and substantial information and data, including that related to the transportation infrastructure for Contra Costa County which is detailed in the report entitled, "Looking to the Future:Challenges and issues for the 2000 update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Pian", published in February 1999 by the Contra Costa Transportation Authority, which provides compelling evidence of significantly changed circumstances that warrant changes to the Urban Limit Line, as provided under Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1,018(a)(5); and, that this General Pian Amendment Study and the Final EIR, constitute the five-year periodic review of the Urban Limit Line, as allowed for under Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1.018(a)(5). RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 3 2. Based on substantial evidence in the record, as documented, referenced, and/or incorporated in the Staff Report to the County Planning Commission, dated June 20,2000,the Final EIR,and testimony and written comments provided at or prior to the public hearing,the Board hereby finds the following relevant criteria and factors for considering whether land area should be located outside of the Urban Limit Line under Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1.010, apply to the following geographic areas considered under this General Plan amendment: a. Crockett Area (see map for Crockett Area, Exhibit"A"to this resolution) • Sec.82-1.010(b) "open space,parks, and other recreation areas" The two sites, which constitute the land area and the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, have been or will be acquired by the East Bay Regional Park District for parkland purposes. Evidence: Past Bay Regional Park District Master Plan (1997, East Bay Regional Park District Carquinez Regional Shoreline Land Use Plan(1998), East Bay Regional Park District Carquinez Strait Resource Plan(1998),Carquinez Strait Resources Coordinating Council • Sec. 82-1.010(c) "lands with slopes in excess of twenty six percent" The two sites, which constitute the land area and are the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, have slopes In excess of twenty six percent. Evidence: Map of Slope Areas in Excess of 26%, Figure 10-7, page 10- 42, Safety Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995- 2010 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map (7.5 Minute Series), Benicia Quadrangle, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department • Sec. 82-1.010(e) "other areas not appropriate for urban growth because of physical unsuitability for development, unstable geological conditions, inadequate water availability, the lack of appropriate infrastructure, distance from existing development, likelihood of substantial environmental damage or substantial injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat, and other similar factors " The two sites, which constitute the land area and are the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, are not suitable for urban use because inadequate water availability, lack of appropriate infrastructure, distance from existing development, and they provide important habitat for animal wildlife and plant species. Evidence: Staff Report to Contra Costa County Planning Commission, June 20,2000 Roadway and Transit Network Plans, Designations, and Design Critieria (pages 5-12 to 5-28; and County Roadway Network Plan) Transportation and Circulation Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 "Looking to the Future: Challenges and Issues for the 2000 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan" Contra Costa Transportation Authority (February 1999); and Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 4 Transportation Plan, Centra Costa Transportation Authority (public review draft-May 1,2000) Carquinez Regional Shoreline Land Use Pian(1998), East Bay Regional Park District Carquinez Strait Resource Plan (1998), Carquinez Strait Resources Coordinating Council b.1. Martinez Ridge(see map for Martinez Area, Exhibit"B"to this resolution) • Sec. 82-1.010(b) "open space,parks,and other recreation areas " Almost all of the land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, has been acquired by the East Bay Regional Park District, City of Martinez, or the John Muir Regional Land Trust for parkland and/or open space purposes. Evidence: East Bay Regional Park District, Master Plan(1997), East Say Regional Park District Carquinez Strait Resource Plan (1998), Carquinez Strait Resources Coordinating Council Sec.82-1.010(c) "lands with slopes in excess of twenty six percent" The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, has slopes in excess of twenty six percent. Evidence: Map of Slope Areas in Excess of 26%, Figure 10-7, page 10- 42, Safety Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995- 2010 Scenic Resource Areas Policies/implementation Measures, pages 9-6 to 9-8, and Map (Figure 9-1, page 9-9) Open Space Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map (7.5 Minute Series), Benicia Quadrangle, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department b.2. John Muir Historic Site (see map for Martinez Area, Exhibit "B", to this resolution) • Sec. 82-1.010(b) "open space,parks,and other recreation areas " The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is a park and national monument operated by the U.S. National Park Service Evidence: East Bay Regional Park District, Master Plan (1997), East Bay Regional Park District Carquinez Strait Resource Plan (1998), Carquinez Strait Resources Coordinating Council Parks and Recreation Policies/implementation Measures, pages 9-17 to 9-37, Open Space Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 5 b.3. Shell Marsh(see map for Martinez Area, Exhibit"B"to this resolution) • Sec. 82-1.010(b) "open space,parks, and other recreation areas" Approximately 200 acres (+1-) of the land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is now part of the Waterbird Regional Preserve owned and operated by the East Say Regional Park District. Evidence: Waterbird Regional Preserve Land Use Plan (1999), East Say Regional Park District East Bay Regional Park District, Master Plan (19,97), East Bay Regional Park District Carquinez Strait Resource Plan (1998), Carquinez Strait Resources Coordinating Council • Sec.82-1.010(d) "wetlands " The majority of the land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is part of a natural wetland or marsh. Evidence: Waterbird Regional Preserve Land Use Plan(1999) East Bay Regional Park District, East Bay Regional Park District, Master Plan (1997), East Bay Regions Park District Carquinez Strait Resource Plan (1998), Carquinez Strait Resources Coordinating Council Flood Hazard Area Policies/Implementation Measures, page 10-48 to 10-53, and Map of Flood Hazard Areas, Figure 10-8, Safety Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 United States Geological Survey(USGS)Topographic Map(7.5 Minute Series), Benicia Quadrangle, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department c. Tassajara Area(see map for Tassajara Area, Exhibit"C"to this resolution) • Sec.82-1.010(c) "lands with slopes in excess of twenty six percent" The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification,has slopes in excess of twenty six percent. Evidence: Map of Slope Areas in Excess of 26%, Figure 10-7, page 10- 42, Safety Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995- 2010 Scenic Resource Areas Policies/Implementation Measures, pages 9-6 to 9-8, and Map (Figure 9-1, page 9-9) Open Space Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map (7.5 Minute Series),Tassajara Quadrangle, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department Tassajara Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report, Contra Costa County File GES#930008 and RZ#943022, SCH#93043088,Vols. 1-2: Figure 4.2-3,26%Slope Study RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 6 Sec. 82-1.010(9) "other areas not appropriate for urban growth because of physical unsuitability for development, unstable geological conditions, inadequate water availability, the lack of appropriate infrastructure, distance from existing development, likelihood of substantial environmental damage or substantial injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat, and other similar factors " The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is not suitable for urban use because it Is not currently served by a water supply delivery system or a wastewater treatment and export system, it lacks other appropriate infrastructure, and it is distant from existing development. Much of the land area is presently used for agricultural purposes, such as cattle grazing or equestrian related activities. Some of the land area provides important habitat for wildlife and plant species. Much of the unincorporated area of Tassajara is not only remote from existing urban development (between 1 and 5 miles from the nearest urbanized area) but it is also remote from the primary roadway network and regional highway system. Additionally,the Year 2000 Update:Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan (public review draft - May 1, 2000, subsequently adopted July 19, 2000) projects traffic volumes to far exceed carrying capacity for the roadway network serving this area and significant improvements to the carrying capacity of the area roadway network and highway system serving the Tassajara area are not expected prior to Year 2010. Evidence: Staff Report to Contra Costa County Planning Commission, June 20,2000 Tassajara Project, Draft Environmental Impact Report, Contra Costa County File GP#930008 and RZ#943022, SCN#95043088, Vols. 1-2: Section 4.4 Biological Resources, pages 4.4-37 to 4.4-46, and Fig.4.4-1, Plant Cover and Natural Communities; Section 4.9, Public Utilities, Water Supply, pages 4.9-6 to 4.9-26; Section 4.5, Traffic and Circulation, page 4.5-42 to 4.5-86 Roadway and Transit Network Plans, Designations, and Design Critleria (pages 5-12 to 5-28; and County Roadway Network Plan) Transportation and Circulation Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 -Looking to the Future: Challenges and issues for the 2000 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan; Contra Costa Transportation Authority (February 1999); and Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan, Contra Costa Transportation Authority (public review draft-May 1,2000) Contra Costa County important Farmlands Map (1998), California Department of Conservation d, Clayton Ranch Area (see Map for Clayton Ranch Area, Exhibit "D" to this resolution) • Sec.82-1.010(b) "open space,parks,and other recreation areas The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit line boundary modification, has been or will be acquired by the East Bay Regional Park District for parkland and open space purposes. Evidence: Lust Bay Regional Park District, Master Plan (1997), East Bay Regional Park District RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Mage 7 Sec.82-1.010(c) "lands with slopes in excess of twenty six percent' The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, has slopes in excess of twenty six percent. Evidence: Map of Slope Areas in Excess of 26%, Figure 10-7, page 10- 42, Safety Element, Contra Costa County(.general Plan, 1995- 2010 Scenic Resource Areas Policies/implementation Measures, pages 9-6 to 9-8, and Map (Figure 9-1, page 9-9) Open Space Element, Contra Costa.County General Plan, 1995-2010 United States Geological Surrey (USGS) Topographic Map (7.5 Minute Series), Clayton Quadrangle, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department • Sec. 82-1.010(e) "other areas not appropriate for urban growth because of physical unsuitability for development, unstable geological conditions, inadequate water availability, the lack of appropriate infrastructure, distance from existing development, likelihood of substantial environmental damage or substantial injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat, and other similar factors" The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is not suitable for urban use because it lacks appropriate infrastructure and it is distant from existing development.The land area was historically used for rangeland purposes and provides important biological habitat for wildlife and plant species. It is not currently served by a system to treat and export wastewater. It is approximately 4-5 miles from the nearest urbanized area (City of Clayton) and it must rely on Marsh Creek Road, a two-lane roadway built to rural road standards, for primary transportation access to the regional roadway and highway network. Evidence: Staff Deport to Contra Costa County Planning Commission, June 20,2000 Roadway and Transit Network Plans, Designations, and Design Critieria (pages 5-12 to 5-28; and County Roadway Network Plan) Transportation and Circulation Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 "Looking to the Future: Challenges and Issues for the 2000 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan" Contra Costa Transportation Authority (February 1999); and Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan, Contra Costa Transportation Authority (public review draft-May 1, 2000) e. Antioch Area(see map of Antioch Area, Exhibit"F"to this resolution) • Sec. 82-1.010(c) "lands with slopes in excess of twenty six percent" The land area, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification,has slopes in excess of twenty six percent. Evidence: Map of Slope Areas in Excess of 26%, Figure 10-7, page 10- 42, Safety Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995- 2010 Scenic Resource Areas Policies/Implementation Measures, pages 9-6 to 9-8,and Map (Figure 9-1, page 9-9) Open Space Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 8 United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map (7.5 Minute Series), Antioch-South Quadrangle, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department • Sec. 82-1.010(e) other areas not appropriate for urban growth because of physical unsuitability for development, unstable geological conditions, inadequate water availability, the lack of appropriate infrastructure, distance from existing development, likelihood of substantial environmental damage or substantial injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat, and other similar factors " The land area, which Is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is not suitable for urban use because it is not currently served by a water supply delivery system or a wastewater treatment and export system, it lacks other appropriate infrastructure, and it is distant from existing development. Much of the land area has historically been used for agricultural purposes, such as cattle grazing, and in several locations it is still used for this purpose. Some of the land area provides Important habitat for wildlife and plant species. The unincorporated area south of Antioch is remote from existing urban development (approximately 2-5 miles from the nearest urbanized area), and the current the road system serving this unincorporated area is constructed and maintained primarily to rural roadway standards. These roads are distant from the primary roadway network and regional highway system serving eastern Contra Costa County. Additionally, the Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Flan (public review draft - May 1, 2000, subsequently adopted July 19, 2000) projects traffic volumes to far exceed carrying capacity for the primary roadway and highway network serving this subregion of Contra Costa County and significant improvements in carrying capacity to the subregion's primary roadway and highway network are not expected prior to Year 2010. Evidence: Staff Report to County Planning Commission,June 20, 2000 Contra Costa County Important Farmlands Map (1998), California Department of Conservation "Looking to the Future: Challenges and Issues for the 2000 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Piano Contra Costa Transportation Authority (February 1999); and Year 2000 Update; Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan, Contra Costa Transportation Authority (public review draft-May 1, 2000) Roadway and Transit Network Plans, Designations, and Design Criteria (pages 5-12 to 5-28, and County Roadway Network Plan) Transportation and Circulation Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 f. Oakley Area(see map of Oakley Area, Exhibit"G"to this resolution) • Sec. 82-1.010(e) " other areas not appropriate for urban growth because of physical unsuitability for development, unstable geological conditions, inadequate water availability, the lack of appropriate Infrastructure, distance from existing development, likelihood of substantial environmental damage or substantial injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat, and other similar factors " The unincorporated land area near Oakley, which is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is not suitable for urban use because it is not currently served by a water supply delivery system or a wastewater treatment and export system, it lacks other appropriate infrastructure, and it is distant from existing development. RESOLUTION NO.2000/366 Page 9 Much of the land area has historically been in agricultural use for row crops and hay or alfalfa production and in several locations it is still used for this purpose. This unincorporated area near Oakley is not only remote from existing urban development (approximately 2-5 miles from the nearest urbanized area). This unincorporated area near Oakley is remote from existing urban development (approximately 2-5 miles from the nearest urbanized area), and the current the road system serving this unincorporated area is constructed and maintained primarily to rural roadway standards. These roads are distant from the primary roadway network and regional highway system serving eastern Contra Costa County. Additionally, the Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan (public review draft-May 1, 2000, subsequently adopted July 19,2000)projects traffic volumes to far exceed carrying capacity for the primary roadway and highway network serving this subregion of Contra Costa County and significant improvements in carrying capacity to the subregion"s primary roadway and highway network are not expected prior to Year 2010. Evidence: Staff Report to County Planning Commission, June 20, 2000 Contra Costa County Important Farmlands Map (1998), California Department of Conservation Roadway and Transit Network Pians, Designations, and Design Criteria (pages 5-12 to 5-28; and County Roadway Network Plan) Transportation and Circulation Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995- 2010 "Looking to the Future: Challenges and Issues for the 2000 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan", Contra Costa Transportation Authority (February 1999); and Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan, Contra Costa Transportation Authority (public review draft - May 1, 2000) g. Veale Tract Area (see map of Veale Tract Area, Exhibit "G" to this resolution) • Sec. 82-1.010(e) " other areas not appropriate for urban growth because of physical unsuitability for development, unstable geological conditions, inadequate water availability, the lack of appropriate infrastructure, distance from existing development, likelihood of substantial environmental damage or substantial injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat, and other similar factors " The unincorporated land area known as Veale Tract, which Is the subject of this Urban Limit Line boundary modification, is not suitable for urban use because it is not currently served by a water supply delivery system or a wastewater treatment and export system, it lacks other appropriate infrastructure, and it is distant from existing development. Much of the land area has historically been in agricultural use for row crops and hay or alfalfa production and it is still used for this purpose. Veale Tract is within the Delta area of Contra Costa County which is prone to flooding during heavy rainstorms in the winter, and it sits within the 100-year Flood Boundary Zone as established on maps prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.Veale Tract is remote from existing urban development (approximately 5 miles from the nearest town, Knightsen, and much further from any significant urbanized area). RESOLUTION NO.20001366 Page 10 The current road system serving this unincorporated area is constructed and maintained primarily to rural roadway standards. These roads are distant from the primary roadway network and regional highway system serving eastern Contra Costa County. Additionally, the Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan (public review draft-May 1, 2000, subsequently adopted July 19, 2000)projects traffic volumes to far exceed carrying capacity for the primary roadway and highway network serving this subregion of Contra Costa. County and significant improvements in carrying to the subregion's primary roadway network and highway system are not expected prior to Year 2010. Evidence: Staff Report to County Planning Commission, June 20,2000 Contra Costa County Important Farmlands Map (1998),California Department of Conservation Flood Hazard Area Policies/implementation Measures, page 10-48 to 10-53, and Map of Flood Hazard Areas, Figure 10-8, Safety Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 Flood insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Contra Costa County, California, panel 060025-400, Federal Emergency Management Agency (effective July 17,1987) United States Geological Survey (USGS) Topographic Map (7.5 Minute Series), Brentwood and Woodward Island Quadrangles, and Overlay Maps, Contra Costa County Community Development Department Roadway and Transit Network Plans, Designations, and Design Criteria(pages 5-12 to 5-28; and County Roadway Network Flan) Transportation and Circulation Element, Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010 "Looking to the Future: Challenges and Issues for the 2000 Update to the Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan". Contra Costa Transportation Authority (February 1999); and Year 2000 Update: Contra Costa Countywide Transportation Plan, Contra Costa Transportation Authority(public review draft-May 1,2000) 3. The Board hereby finds that the aforementioned boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line will not violate the 65/35 land Preservation Standard as set forth under Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1.006 and Section 82- 1.008. Evidence: 65/35 Land Preservation Standard Inventory, June 2000, prepared by Contra Costa County Community Development, and incorporated into the Staff Report to the County Planning Commission,June 20,2000 Final Environmental impact Report (SCH#93-112094), General Plan Amendment Study (GP#990001): Potential Modifications to the Urban Limit Line, prepared by Mundie & Associates and Contra Costa County, Community Development Department, July 2000 RESOLUTION NO.20001366 Page 11 4. The Board hereby finds that the aforementioned boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line, are consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010, and will further the objectives and policies of the General Flan and not obstruct their attainment. Evidence. Staff Report to the County Planning Commission,June 20,2000 Final Environmental impact Report (SCH#t99-112094), General Plan Amendment Study (GP#990001): Potential Modifications to the Urban Limit Line, prepared by Mundie & Associates and Contra Costa County, Community Development Department, July 2000 Testimony and Written Comments provided at or prior to the public hearing conducted by the Board of Supervisors,July 24-25, 2000 5. The Board hereby finds that the aforementioned boundary modifications to the Urban Limit Line, will not cause a violation of the County's Growth Management Element adopted level of service standards for traffic, water, sanitary sewer, fire protection, public protection, parks and recreation, flood control and drainage, as established under the Growth Management Element in the Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010, pursuant to Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 82-1.012. Evidence: Staff Report to the County Planning Commission,June 20,2000 Final Environmental impact Report (SCH#99-112094), General Plan Amendment Study (GP#990001): Potential Modifications to the Urban Limit Line, prepared by Mundie & Associates and Contra Costa County, Community Development Department, July 2000 Testimony and Written Comments provided at or prior to the public hearing conducted by the Board of Supervisors, July 24-25, 2000 IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, the Board determines to adopt this amendment to said plan as the second of the four consolidated amendments to the mandatory elements of the County General Plan in calendar year 2000 as permitted under law. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: Phil atohelor, Clerk of the Board of Supervis rs and County Administrator By. Y61eputy RESOLUTION NO.20001366 Page 12 EXHIBITS TO RESOLUIT'It}N SEE ATTACHED RESOLUTION NO.20001366 Page 13