HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07171984 - 2.2 n
I A�
IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
CANYON LAKES: Setting forth Supplemental )
Responses and Findings to the Final EIR; )
Certifying the Final EIR; Stating )
Overriding Considerations; Ordering )
Cancellation of Land Conservation ) Resolution # 84/ 406
Contracts 20-75 (1945 RZ) and )
21-75 (1944 RZ) ; Approving Preliminary ) July 17, 1984
Development Plan (2571-RZ) and Final )
Development Plan (3041-83) for )
development of the subject property )
under a Planned District. )
WHEREAS, on July 5, 1984, the Board of Supervisors received a memo from the
Director of Planning transmitting the following:
1. The Canyon Lakes Draft Environmental Impact Report dated April 1984;
2. The Environmental Impact Report Responses to Comments, dated June 1984,
which includes written comments received for the Draft EIR, summaries of oral
comments to the Draft EIR, a list of commentators and Response to Comments;
3. A report from the Director of Planning analyzing the requested can-
cellation of Land Conservation Contracts 20-75 and 21-75 which apply to the sub-
ject property;
4. Staff's Canyon Lakes Report, including recommended conditions of appro-
val, dated June 6, 1984 revised June 20, 1984;
5. Staff's Canyon Lakes Supplemental Report dated June 20, 1984;
6. Planning Commission's Revisions to recommended conditions of approval
identified as Exhibit A of the Planning Directors' July 5, 1984 letter to the
Board of Supervisors;
7. SRVAPC Resolution No. 35-1984 (SR) certifying the Canyon Lakes Final
EIR; and
S. SRVAPC Resolution No. 34-1984 (SR) approving Rezoning 2571-RZ and
Development Plan 3041-83.
WHEREAS, after notice lawfully given for cancellation of Land Conservation
Contracts, Rezoning and Final Development Plan, public hearings on each item
were held July 10, 1984 at 2:30 p.m. in the Board of Supervisors chambers in
Martinez, California;
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has considered the recommendations of
Staff, the action of the SRVAPC and the testimony and documents referenced here
and during the July 10, 1984 public hearing;
1
0.0 0.0 9 3
r..j
NOW THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HEREBY RESOLVES, FINDS,
CERTIFIES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
1. EIR: The Canyon Lakes Final EIR is certified as being prepared pur-
suant to CEQA and the State guidelines, with the inclusion of this resolution,
all materials transmitted to the Board by staff on July 5, 1984 and with the
attached findings, further responses and statement of overriding considerations
(as set forth in Exhibits A, B and C, incorporated herein by reference) and
which findings responses and statements of overriding considerations have been
considered and are hereby adopted, made and found by the Board;
2. Land Conservation Contract Cancellation: The parcels of land covered
by Land Conservation Contracts 20-75 and 21-75 were impacted by urban develop-
ment more rapidly than anticipated, and these agreements now stand in the way of
orderly community development serving public housing and transportation needs as
set forth in the applicable County General Plan and therefore, Land Conservation
Contracts 20-75 and 21-75 are hereby cancelled upon the specific findings con-
tained in Exhibit D attached hereto (which is incorporated herein by reference)
and the Clerk of the Board shall record in the office of the County Recorder a
certificate of tentative cancellation and shall implement an unconditional can-
cellation if the final cancellation under Government Code Section 51282.1 is
ineffective for any reason;
3. Canyon Lakes Project: Preliminary Development Plan 2571-RZ and Final
Development Plan 3041-83 are hereby approved and tentative map 6384 is hereby
ratified each with conditions and as recommended by the San Ramon Valley Area
Planning Commission on June 20, 1984 upon the following additional findings:
a. The applicant proposed to start construction during 1984 which is
within two and one-half year period specified;
b. That the Preliminary Development Plan is consistent with and will
implement the the County General Plan;
C. The project will constitute a residential environment of sustained
desirability and stability and will be in harmony with the character of the
surrounding neighborhoods and community;.
d. The development of the harmonious integrated Canyon Lakes plan
justifies the exceptions from the normal application of the zoning ordinances
identified in the project application and conditions of approval, including the
payment of in-lieu park fees at the time of building permit issuance instead of
at the time of Final Map recordation, as otherwise would be required by the
Parkland Dedication Ordinance;
e. The property is affected by special circumstances and conditions,
consisting of rolling hillside topography, on which the project design can be
enhanced by development of the site as a Planned Unit Development incorporating
clustered housing, maximization of open space areas, common use off-street trail
systems, integrated street design, and privately maintained streets;
f. Granting of certain requested exceptions, as set forth in con-
ditions for tentative map approval, is essential to efficient development of the
2
000091:
property as a Planned Unit Development incorporating clustered housing and pri-
vate streets, and therefore the exceptions are necessary for the preservation
and enjoyment of the applicant's right to develop the property in accordance
with the P-1, Planned Unit District;
g. Granting of the exceptions will not be materially detrimental to
the public welfare or injurious to other property in the territory in which
Canyon Lakes is situated;
h. The effect of county ordinances and actions adopted pursuant to
the Subdivision Map Act on the housing needs of the region of Contra Costa
County has been considered. Consideration has included examination of the
Canyon Lakes project's potential to increase the stock of affordable housing
available to the employees of nearby employment centers including the Bishop
Ranch Business Park. Canyon Lakes will improve the overall jobs/housing balance
within the region. The commission has considered the balance of regional
housing needs against the public service needs of county residents as well as
against the avialable fiscal and environmental resources, as these needs and
resources have been identified-within the Canyon Lakes EIR and further iden-
tified within the approval process for the Canyon Lakes project;
1. The Canyon Lakes subdivision has been designed to the extent
feasible for future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. Lot
sizes and lot configurations have been designed to allow for east/west align-
ment of structures, southern exposure of structures and advantageous exposure of
structures to shade and breezes, to the extent feasible considering the com-
bination of: the site's rolling topography; the need for adequate street
access, drainage and sewerage; the need to maximize advantageous exposure to
project recreation facilities which include lakes, streams, golf- courses and
open space and; the need to preserve project density; and
j. As indicated in the legend of the applicant's plans P-1, P-2 and
P-6, condominium/rental is the proposed land use for parcels J, L, O, Q, S, AA,
MM and 00 as those parcels are identified on the tentative Map 6384, plan P-7.
Tentative Map 6384 plan P-7 shows the number of proposed units for each of the
condominium parcels, and as well for each of the condominium parcels, EE, GG, II
and JJ. Accordingly, these are condominium projects and no further tentative
map approval shall be required for filing condominium final map(s) for parcels
J, L, O, S, Q, AA, EE, GG, II, JJ, MM and 00.
3
000090
u
4. The Director of Planning and County Counsel are directed forthwith to
prepare and post a notice of determination and to distribute copies of the Final
EIR in the. customary manner.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 1984 by the following vote:
Ayes: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder and Torlakson
Noes: None
Absent: Supervisor McPeak
I hereby aw"that this Is a true and M IsotQM of
an ec#on taken wW entered on Wo 1Mn40ft of Ift
dowd of Supervisors on *49 data#hewn.
ATTESTED:
J.R. OLSS , COU TY CLERK
and ox officio Cie.*of Ow Board
B,► ___.�.. .ceouty
cc: Director of Planning
County Counsel.
Public Works Director
Daniel Van Voorhis
Page & Addison, Attorneys
4
000000
r
EXHIBIT A
SUPPLEMENTAL FINDINGS
RELATING TO THE DEIR
MITIGATION MEASURES, PROJECT ALTERNATIVES AND
SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
EIR MITIGATION MEASURES
The following consists of a listing of the mitigation measures contained within
the DEIR, and a finding made for each mitigation measure. As used below, "RZ"
refers to conditions for approval of Preliminary Development Plan #2571-RZ and
Final Development Plan 3041-83. The Board of Supervisors concurs with the eva-
luation of the DEIR measures set forth in the applicant's comments to the DEIR
except as noted.
1. Mitigation of Williamson Act cancellation: "None available to mitigate this
impact."
Finding: It is infeasible, due to the scope of the proposed project and
other social and economic considerations to take any action other than to
consider cancellation or denial of the petitions to cancel the Williamson
Act contracts. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted.
LAFCO
2. Mitigation: Annex the site to Contra Costa Sanitary District.
Finding: Annexation is required by RZ condition #30.
3. Mitigation: Annex the site to County Service Area. R-7.
Finding: Annexation to R-7 or another appropriate district is required by
RZ condition #29.
4. Mitigation: Annex the site to an appropriate county service area for
street lighting.
Finding: Annexation is required by RZ condition #31.
SCHOOLS
3. Mitigation: Voluntarily dedicate a ten-acre elementary school site or
create a special financing mechanism (e.g. Community Services District).
Finding: RZ condition #27 requires the applicant to provide the District a
10-year option to purchase a 10-acre site for only the cost of grading, with
an opportunity to finance the grading cost out of future fees. The proposal
Is fair. The purchase price is a fraction of the value of the land and the
option and payment arrangement Is essentially. a "voluntary dedication."
-1-
0.0009
6. Mitigation: Apply the County's School Facilities Dedication Ordinance for
interim school facilities. (This would not provide for support facilities
such as laboratories or gymnasia.)
Finding: RZ condition $27 requires compliance with the County's School
Facilities Dedication Ordinance, for provision of interim school facilities.
The primary obligation to finalize permanent school facilities lies with the
State of California and the State should do so. If the State cannot fund
schools, the Board of Supervisors would need to consider a moratorium. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted.
7. Mitigation: Require compliance with EBMUD's water conservation guidelines
(after they are approved by EBMUD).
Finding: RZ condition #32 requires compliance with water conservation
requirements as uniformly applied to all development projects. Suggestions
for greater requirements should be directed to EBMUD.
SEWER/WASTE WATER
9. Mitigation: Annex the site to the Central Contra Costa County Sanitary
District.
Finding: RZ condition #30 requires annexation.
9. Mitigation: Comply with all District policies on service to the site and to
individual units.
Finding: RZ condition #33 requires compliance with all uniformly applied
requirements of the District.
POLICE SERVICES
10. Mitigation: Participate with other developers in the area in the dedication
and construction of a protective services facility.
Finding: RZ condition #28 requires future examination of the feasibility of
designating a law enforcement site within Canyon Lakes Area H. It is
infeasible to require Canyon Lakes to participate In a non existent program
for dedicating and improving a protective services facility. A Statment of
Overriding Considerations has been adopted for any unmitigated effects asso-
ciated with not requiring such participation.
11. Mitigation: Include defensible space concepts In the project design to the
extent practicable, Including:
Designing home entry ways to be visible from the street;
Providing house numbers which are visible from the street both day and
night;
Ensuring that movable portions of sliding glass doors are mounted on
the Inside track;
-2-
000U
Providing deadbolt locks on all exterior doors and locks on all win-
dows.
Finding: RZ condition #34 requires consideration of such defensible space
concepts.
12. Mitigation: Design the proposed pathway in Watson Canyon to maximize its
use.
Finding: The 12-foot wide pathway has been designed by the applicant to be
available for an unrestricted variety of uses, including walking, jogging,
cycling, and golfing for all residents of Canyon Lakes. The Watson Canyon
Trail provides the most direct circulation link between the northern and
southern ends of the project, while alternative use of streets requires tra-
veling a much more circuitous route. Maximum use of the trail is therefore
encouraged by availability to a variety of users and by virtue of the trail
furnishing the most direct linkage between the northern and southern ends of
the project.
FIRE SERVICES
13. Mitigation: Provide .an adequate public water supply for firefighting pur-
poses.
Finding: RZ condition #38 requires the water system to be adequate for
f iref ighting.
14. Mitigation: Construct access roads and drives for all-weather use and
design them to provide rapid access for firefighting equipment.
Finding: RZ condition #38 requires all weather surfaces for roads during
the rainy season. Rapid access is possible during dry periods without pro-
vision of all-weather surfacing.
15. Mitigation: Provide a weed abatement program.
Finding: RZ condition #39 requires a weed abatement program.
16. Mitigation: Construct exterior walls and roofs of county fire resistant
materials.
Finding: RZ condition #37 requires compliance with the UBC and other
building and fire codes. These codes establish County standards for fire
resistant exterior materials. To hold Canyon Lakes to a higher standard
would increase housings costs and create a competitive disadvantage.
Suggested amendments should be directed to the agency responsible for the
UBC.
17. Mitigation: Install supervised sprinkler systems in all non-residential
structures (hotel, clubhouse, etc.)
Finding: RZ condition #37 requires compliance with the UBC and other codes.
These codes specify County standards for sprinkler systems.
-3-
000099
i
18. Mitigation: Install spark arrestors in all chimneys serving solid or liquid
burning heating and cooking units.
Finding: RZ condition $37 requires compliance with the UBC and other codes.
These codes establish County standards for spark arrestors.
19. Mitigation: Provide access for firegfighting units to the open space areas.
Finding: RZ condition X36 requires provision of access to open space areas.
LIBRARY SERVICE
20. Mitigation: Establish an additional library facility in the San
Ramon/Danville area. Consider establishing a development fee, similar to
those currently required for school and park services for library services.
Finding: It is infeasible due to social, economic and other considerations,
to establish an additional library, and to participate in a non-existent
program of development fees, as a part of the design or approval of a single
development project such as Canyon Lakes. A Statement of Overriding
Considerations has been adopted for any unmitigated effects associated with
not requiring Canyon Lakes to establish a library and not requiring par-
ticipation in a non-existent program of development fees. RZ condition X28
requires that the feasibility of providing a site with area "H" be examined
prior to final approval of plans for that area.
PARKS AND RECREATION
21. Mitigation: Annex the site to County service area R7.
Finding: RZ condition #29 requires annexation to the appropriate recreation
district.
22. Mitigation: Utilize the park dedication fees derived from the project to
develop area park sites, e.g. at the Vista Ramon Park.
Finding: This suggestion would limit flexibility. Further, _it is
infeasible due to economic, social and other considerations, to designate
Canyon Lakes park dedication fees for development of specific parks. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted.
23. Mitigation: Redesign the trail system to connect to compatible systems on
adjacent properties.
Finding: There is no trail system on adjacent properties, other than
sidewalks within street rights-of-way. RZ condition #12 requires the path-
way to provide adequate access to sidewalks at the perimeter of the project.
24. Mitigation: Coordinate the trail system with the East Bay Regional Park
District.
Finding: The East Bay Regional Park District has defined no trail system
adjacent to the site and the parcel of land which may be of Interest to the
District has already been offered.
-4-
000100
25. Mitigation: Deed the development rights of all recreational facilities,
Including the golf course, to the County.
Finding: RZ condition #16 so requires.
26. Mitigation: Study the recreational potential of a portion of the open space -
lands at the north end of the site being developed for soccer or ball
fields.
Finding: RZ condition #17 requires a feasibility study of the area and
dedication of the land as directed by the Planning Commission.
27. Mitigation: Deed the development rights to open space areas of the County.
Finding: RZ condition #16 so requires.
28. Mitigation: Consider gift-deeding those portions of the open space land
which would help create a new regional parkland in the area to the East Bay
Regional Park District.
Finding: RZ condition #27 requires an offer of dedication of 75± acres to
the EBRPD.
SOILS AND GEOLOGY
General Finding: A series of potential mitigation measures (detailed below)
were inventoried in a soils report prepared by Engeo Inc. The Engeo report
includes the measures as general recommendations which may be appropriate for
site specific conditions. Since conditions vary from area to area within the
1,050-acre project, all measures are not warranted at each building site.
Appropriate measures must be developed for each site, dependent upon specific
soils conditions at the site under direction of a licensed engineer. To imple-
ment the mitigation measures, RZ condition #43 requires that these "Engeo"
mesures be used where determined appropriate, pursuant to County code require-
ments, and pursuant to the recommendations of geotechnical consultants.
29. Mitigation: Provide structure foundations piers-and-grade beams or a rigid
structural concrete mat, in either case accompanied by replacement of five
feet of the rock at a cut/fill transition to counteract differential soil
and rock expansion. Provide special treatment for roadways and slabs-on-
grade for garages. Could include lime-treated soil to reduce the clay's
expansion potential, or thick aggregate layers below the structural
materials. Limiting the difference In fill thickness below structures to
about 10 feet to control differential fill settlement.
Finding: Structural foundations and special treatment for slabs-on-grade
are required where appropriate by RZ condition #43A and 43B.
30. Mitigation: Provide drainage Installations to control and lead roof runoff
away from foundations at all times, to assure pad drainage to the street,
and not allow overbank flows. Concrete-lined drainage ditches on cuts at
the 3:1 and 4:1 slopes may be eliminated provided the cuts are promptly
-5-
revegated. Provide special ditches, benches, or both for fill slopes more
than 30 feet high.
Finding: Drainage Installation, special ditches and benches are required by
County codes and RZ condition 43C.
31. Mitigation: Prevent overbank erosion from drainage of the building pla-
teaus onto graded or natural slopes. Grade the cut or compact fill slope at
the edge of the pad to drain at 10 percent for a distance of about 10 feet
f rom the edge.
Finding: RZ condition #48 and 87 requires preparation of a program to
minimize erosion.
32. Mitigation: Grade slopes to 3:1 to 4:1 slope ratios to mitigate most cut
clope stability problems. Provide additional study for the highest cuts and
those that are close to landslides before grading. Inspect all cuts, level
and sloped, by an engineering geologist. Prepare geologic maps to present
individual foundation recommendations and make extrapolation of geologic
information possible as grading progresses.
Finding: The project as proposed incorporates use of 3:1 and 4:1 slopes.
Study of cuts and inspection of cuts is required by RZ condition 043 which
requires all grading and soils work to be performed under the supervision of
the applicant's geotechnical consultant. As-built geologic maps are
required by RZ condition #45.
33. Mitigation: Evaluate treatment of unbuttressed fills, particularly those
with evaluation of landslides in their foundation areas. In some cases
fill's foundations should be investigated carefully for subsurface foun-
dation conditions and the level and pressure head in any groundwater should
be determined before grading permits are issued.
Finding: RZ condition #43 requires all grading and soils work to be per-
formed under the supervision of the applicant's geotechnical consultant.
Such supervision typically includes investigation of subsurface fill's foun-
dation conditions where appropriate.
34. Mitigation: Intercept subsurface water in fill foundation areas, including
many fills in small drainages, and lead to surface drainage facilities. In
a few places springs also need to be intercepted. Provide frequent eva-
luation by the soil engineer and engineering geologist as grading
progresses.
Finding: RZ condition #43D requires interception of subsurface waters where
appropriate.
35. Mitigation: Provide for maintenance of facilities that carry water
underground and provide easy access to them is necessary. Facilities
installed for stabilization throughout the development should be located by
the soil engineers, surveyed by the civil engineer, and placed in private
storm drainage easements based on as-built reports and maps.
-6-
0DO .�
1 3
1
Finding: RZ condition #43E requires access for maintenance of underground
storm drainage facilities where appropriate. RZ condition #43F requires
mapping of subsurface facilities where appropriate.
36. Mitigation: Revegetate graded cut and fill slopes as soon as possible, and
always before rainy season. Hydro-mulch large graded expanses. Provide
stabilizing forestation with carefully selected water-tapping species on
some marginal slopes. County standards provide retention basins and
drainage retardants for leveller slopes.
Finding: RZ condition #47 requires revegetation. RZ conditions #48 and #87
require development of an erosion protection plan, which typically include .
provisions for retention basins and drainage retardants.
37. Mitigation: Provide setbacks of 50-feet (100-foot wide) from the two inac-
tive faults. Verify the fault's widths. Depict a building setback zone on
final subdivision maps rather than a fault setback, If the fault is not
active.
Finding: A setback is proposed in project plans as recommended by appli-
cant's experts and is required by RZ condition #46.
38. Mitigation: Apply building code requirements to mitigate the effects of
groundshaking on structures.
Finding: RZ condition #49 requires application of the building code and
further requirements should arise from amendment to the UBC.
39. Mitigation: Actual peak acceleration could be smaller or larger, depending
on many factors that the design earthquake for a magnitude 6.5 earthquake on
the nearest known active fault, the Calaveras. The probability of a nearby
earthquake causing higher peak acceleration and apply- result to the most
critical fills.
Finding: Design of fills in response to earthquake shaking will be per-
formed upon recommendation of geotechnical consultants and in accordance
with County standards and code requirements.
HYDROLOGY/NATER QUALITY
40. Mitigation: Design the detention basins to accomodate the runoff produced
by a storm with a 100 year recurrence interval for ultimate development of
the watershed. They must also be designed to limit discharge flow quan-
tities to less or equal to that produced currently by the 25 year storm.
Since several portions of the project will drain, without detention,
directly into the off-site drainage system, other upstream areas should
release less runoff than that currently produced by the 25 year storm.
Finding: RZ condition #85 requires a principal spillway which can pass on
no more discharge than poroduced by a 25-year storm or a 10-year storm, as
determined by the size of the upstream watershed. RZ conditions #83 and 84
require that basins be designed with emergency spillways which can discharge
-7
�' n J A3
the runoff from a storm with a 100-year recurrence interval without damage
to the structure.
41. Mitigation: Provide a program of dredging in the plans prior to project
approval to prevent the lake from filling in, and losing its storm-water
detention capacity, if the lake is to be used for sediment control.
Finding: RZ conditions #'s 81, 82, 87 and 88 provide for a program to pre-
vent the lake from filling in.
42. Mitigation: Require the developer to perform grading operations during the
dry weather season to stabilize slopes when grading Is complete, and to pro-
vide temporary erosion control during construction operations.
Finding: RZ conditions #'s 41, 47, and 48 require grading during dry
periods, revegetation of slopes and erosion control.
43. Mitigation: Require the developer to retain a professional lake management
service to help mitigate the biotic problems of retaining runoff in small,
perennial waterbodies, including the ponds as well as the lake. Require the
siltation control plan and lake management plan prior to approval of this
development.
Finding: RZ condition #88 requires retention of a lake management service
and preparation of a siltation control and lake management plan.
44. Mitigation: Require the project to maintain all drainage facilities,
including lake, ponds, streams, and culverts off-road since these facilities
are largely of aesthetic and other benefit to these parties, and their con-
tinued operation Is vitally important to downstream areas.
Finding: RZ condition #81 requires the applicant to provide for main-
tenance.
BIOLOGY
45. Mitigation: Plant drought resistant vegetation for landscaping. Exposed
cut slopes should be revegetated with . plant species native to the Bay
Region.
Finding: RZ condition #l0A provides for use of drought tolerant and native
species.
46. Mitigation: Replace the riparian stream habitats with native riparian vege-
tation approved by the California Department of Fish and Game. Maintenance
(clearing of debris, etc.) along the new creek areas should be as minimal as
possible, but consistent with public safety and security along the pathway.
Finding: RZ condition #IOB requires identification of riparian vegetation
to be used after consultation with the Department of Fish and Game.
47. Mitigation: Construct the proposed artificial lake and storm drain
(culvert) system In accordance with design criteria provided by the Contra
-8-
000104.
i
Costa Mosquito Abatement District. These could Include circulation and
filtration of the large lake and modification of the new stream beds so that
total flushing will occur and no backwaters will form in which mosquitoes
could reproduce. Mosquito-eating fish could be introduced. A professional
lake management company should be retained to control aquatic weed and algal
bloom problems which may occur.
Finding: RZ condition #88 requires retention of a lake management service
to control biotic problems in the lakes. Specific mitigation measures for
contol of mosquitoes will be developed within the lake management plan.
48. Mitigation: Submit a revised landscaping plan to the Planning Department
for approval prior to the first subdivision. That plan should stress reve-
getation with native species, particularly species native to Contra Costa
County. Aesthetic values can be attained along with the low water consump-
tion, erosion control, and re-establishment of wildlife values along natural
drainages.
Finding: RZ condition #10 requires submittal of landscaping plans.
Condition #l0A requires use of native species acceptable to the Zoning
Administrator.
49. Mitigation: File an erosion and sediment control plan which will include a
revegetation plan featuring native drought-resistant plant species.
Finding: RZ conditions #'s 10A, 48 and 87 provide for drought tolerant
vegetation and control of erosion and sediment.
VISUAL QUALITY
50. Mitigation: Replant graded areas to remain undeveloped with native trees
and other plant species. Presently there are virtually no trees along the
eastern slopes of the valley, which contrasts dramatically with the more
lush western slopes.
Finding: RZ condition #!OA provides for use of native trees and other spe-
cies.
31. Mitigation: Use roof and wall materials that could blend in as much as
possible with the surroundings.
Finding: RZ condition #11 provides for Zoning Administrator review of
colors and materials.
32. Mitigation: Avoid night lighting to the greatest practical extent. Night
lighting should be below eye level, no on overhead standards.
Finding: RZ condition #12F requires submittal of a unified lighting plan
emphasizing use of low intensity lighting.
53. Mitigation: Submit a revised landscaping plan for County review and appro
val. Said plan shall provide for preceding landscaping mitigations and for
replacing proposed elm tree plantings- with other acceptable tree plantings.
-9-
000- 5
Finding: RZ condition #10 requires submittal of landscape plans and provi-
des for elimination of elm trees.
34. Mitigation: Submit a revised grading plan for County review and approval.
Said plan shall provide for preservation of the screening functionprovided
by the knoll located on the western side of Area H (clubhouse/hotel area .
Finding: RZ condition #3 requires submittal of applications for Preliminary
Development Plan, Final Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map for
Area H. Preservation of the screening function of the knoll by preserving
the knoll Is infeasible due to economic, social and other considerations. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted for any unmitigated
effects associated with not preesrving the knoll.
AIR QUALITY
53. Mitigation: Sprinkle unpaved construction areas with water at least twice a
day during construction to reduce dust generation, and revegetate graded or
vacant land as soon as construction Is complete. Immediately revegetate
graded or vacant land with a ground cover if building construction Is post-
poned. Suspend grading operations when winds exceed 12 mph, to reduce wind
erosion and dust emissions.
Finding: RZ condition #48 requires preparation of a program to minimize
generation of dust. Such programs are typically required by the County and
typically include sprinkling and revegetation. It is infeasible due to eco-
nomic, social and other considerations, to suspend operations when winds
exceed 12 mph. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted
for any unmitigated effects.
56. Mitigation: Phase grading and site development to coincide with the
building construction schedule, preparing only those portions of the site as
needed to meet their phasing schedule. _
Finding: RZ condition #48 requires preparation of a program to minimize
dust. Grading is proposed by the applicant to occur in 2-3 major phases in
which excavated material can be immediately placed into proposed fill area.
The proposed phasing of grading will minimize, to the extent feasible, the
time period during which adjoining residents will be exposed to the noise of
grading.
37. Mitigation measures for reducing congestion and delays for cumulative traf-
fic in the San Ramon Valley area would also reduce emissions of vehicular
air pollutants. (See Traffice Mitigation Measures).
Finding: RZ conditions 30 through 79 provide for mitigation of traffic
Impacts, thus reducing emissions.
38. Mitigation: Design project with minimal paved surfaces, substituting gra-
vel, brick, bark, and other materials as appropriate on surfaces not exposed
to frequent vehicle travel. This would reduce hyddrocarbon emissions from
paving operations during construction.
-10-
0001_P
Finding: As proposed, the project Includes a trail system which Is the pri-
mary paved surface which Is not exposed to. frequent vehicle travel. The
trail is proposed to be constructed of concrete. Other walkways within the
project may be constructed of asphalt, and may therefore emit hydrocarbons
during construction. The minimal reduction of hydrocarbon emissions
accomplished by reducing paving operations for walkways is insignificant and
acceptable due to the fact that any minimal reduction in emissions may be
exceeded by increased vehicular hydrocarbon emissions related to increased
maintenance activity for non-asphaltic surfaces.
TRAFFIC
General Findings:
(A) RZ conditions #'s 50 through 79 establish a program for implementation
of the traffic mitigation measures. The program requires on-site
improvement to be built simultaneously with project construction. The
program provides funding for construction of off-site improvements as
warranted by traffic conditions. Off-site improvements will be
constructed by the County using monies generated by this and other
development in the vicinity under a road impact fee of $1,000 per unit
(RZ conditions #72 and 74). The amount of the fee was determined
by estimating the total cost of Canyon Lakes' share of off-site
improvements and dividing the total cost by Canyon Lakes' 3,090 units.
(B) The program provides flexibility, including . Incentives for the
developer to participate in extending Crow Canyon Road from Canyon
Lakes' easterly boundary to Tassajara Road. Incentives are provided in
two options to the basic program of paying $1,000 per unit to the
County. The first option allows that if Canyon Lakes funds the
extension, then the County will establish a fee benefit area for other
benefited land owners to reimburse Canyon Lakes' costs associated with
constructing the road (RZ condition #75). If this option is chosen,
Canyon Lakes will incur substantial additional financing costs for
"front-ending" the extension expense, while Canyon Lakes will not incur
these financing costs If the option is not taken, therefore, to
partially compensate Canyon Lakes for the financing costs and thereby
provide an incentive for constructing the extension, RZ condition #75
allows a reduction of per unit fees from $1,000 to $250. The second
option (RZ condition #78) provides for establishment of an assessment
district to fund extension of Crow Canyon Road In exchange for a
similar fee reduction. In both options, all traffic Improvements
needed (on and off site) for Canyon Lakes will be funded and installed.
(C) Irrespective of the option utilized, Canyon Lakes Is required to
contribute sufficient monies to cover the cost of constructing the
traffic improvements which are necessary to mitigate Canyon Lakes' fair
share of traffic impacts and the following mitigation measures are
accommodated RZ conditions #'s 50 through 79:
59. Mitigation: Install additional signal arms and head at those Intersections
where additional legs are planned due to the extension of an existing road.
-11-
000107
This includes the intersections of Crow Canyon Road and Crow Canyon Place,
Norris Canyon Road and Alcosta Boulevard, Bollinger Canyon Road and Chevron
Entrance/Connector, and Bollinger Canyon Road and Alcosta Boulevard.
60. Mitigation: Install signals at the existing intersections of Crow Canyon
Road and El Captan Drive, Alcosta Boulevard and Montevideo Drive, Alcosta
Boulevard and Village Parkway, and Alcosta Boulevard and the I-680 ramps
(2). Further signals may be warranted at intersections along Alcosta
Boulevard south of Bollinger Canyon Road; however, these Intersections were
not included in this analysis.
61. Mitigation: Install signals at the planned/proposed intersections of
Bollinger Canyon Road and the I-680 ramps (2), and Alcosta Boulevard and
site entrances south of Bollinger Canyon Road (2). Further, a pedestrian-
activated signal will be warranted to cross Alcosta Boulevard south of
Norris Canyon Road.
62. Mitigation: Install signals at the site entrance along Crow Canyon Road if
Crow Canyon Road is extended east of the Canyon Lakes project site as it is
generally planned. At this time, it would be desirable to provide conduit
and right-of-way for signals at these intersections in the event that Crow
Canyon Road is extended.
63. Mitigation: All of the signals installed should be compatible with the
existing signals in the San Ramon area. This allows for signal coordination
in the future.
64. Install turn lanes at the three intersections would operate at the unaccep-
table level of service given the estimated traffic volumes. These Intersec-
tions are Bollinger Canyon Road and Alcosta Boulevard (AM peak) , Bollinger
Canyon Road and Chevron Entrance/Connector (PM peak), and Crow Canyon Road
and Crow Canyon Place (PM peak).
65. Mitigation: Install additional left-turn lane (two total) on the south leg
of the intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and Alcosta Boulevard. This
improvement provides a level of service "C" in the AM peak-hour and "A" in
the PM peak-hour.
66. Mitigation: Install an additional left-turn lane of the south leg of the
intersection of Bollinger Canyon Road and the Chevron Entrance/Connector.
This improvement will provide a level of service "C" in the PM peak-hour.
67. Mitigation: A limited number of I-680 on and off-ramps will require two
lanes to accommodate the ramp volume. This analysis is based on the ramp
volume only and does not include merging with freeway or arterial traffic,
storage requirements in the advent of ramp metering, or intersection opera-
tions.
68. Mitigation: Install two lanes In the loop ramp that accommodates the move-
ment of traffic from southbound I-680 to eastbound Crow Canyon Road. The
northbound I-680 and southbound I-680 off-ramps to eastbound Bollinger
Canyon Road will require two lanes each. Those ramps that provide access to
-12-
000108
and from the area west of I-680 will require one lane each to accommodate
the estimated ramp volumes.
69. Mitigation: At the Alcosta Boulevard interchange, one lane on each ramp
will be adequate to accommodate the estimated ramp volumes.
70. Mitigation: Caltrans may install ramp metering to facilitate the through
flow on the freeway as the freeway and ramps become congested. Should this
occur, additional storage would be required on those ramps that are metered
and on the adjacent arterials.
71. Mitigation: Install two lanes in the westbound direction between El Capitan
and the westerly site entrance to acommodtae the double left turn at the
site entrance. During the course of this analysis, it was determined that
Crow Canyon Road within the Canyon Lakes project would require two lanes
(one in each direction) to provide an acceptable level of service.
72. Mitigation: Install additional lanes in the event that Crow Canyon Road is
extended east to Camino Tassajara. The likely ultimate width of Crow Canyon
Road in the vicinity of the project site is six lanes (three In each
direction). This width should be provided for with the necessary right-of-
way.
73. Mitigation: Evaluate the need for devices for those intersections along
Alcosta Boulevard not included in this analysis.
74. Mitigation: Install turn lanes at the Intersections of Bollinger Canyon
Road and Alcosta Boulevard, Bollinger Canyon Road and Chevron/Connector, and
Crow Canyon Road and Crow Canyon Place.
75. Mitigation: Provide further study of the ramps providing access between
Bolling Canyon Road east of I-680 and I-680 south of .Bollinger Canyon Road
(by Caltrans), taking into consideration the future I-680 projections in the
vicinity of the Crow Canyon Road and Bollinger Canyon Road interchanges.
76. Mitigation: Provide a right-of-way to accommodate six through lanes on Crow
Canyon Road within the Canyon Lakes project. Additional right-of-way will
be required at the intersections to accommodate turning lanes.
NOISE
77. Mitigation: Provide a noise study report as required by Title 25 of the
California Administrative Code Noise Insulation Standards for multiple-
family structures within the projected 60 DBA countour. A generalized
acoustical study should be prepared by the applicant prior to the prepara-
tion of the noise study required by Title 25.
Finding: The County has determined that additional studies are not required
by Title 25. The project must comply with all other requirements of Title
25.
78. Mitigation: Expand the landscaped arterial corridors between Crow Canyon
Road and Alcosta Bolevard and proposed multiple family residential units to
Include the outer limit of the 60 CNEL area.
-13-
000 X09
Finding: Expansion of landscaped corridors to the outer limits of the 60
CNEL countour is unnecessary if the project is designed to include noise
insulation pursuant to the requirements of Title 25.
79. Mitigation: Limit construction traffic on local roadways to weekday. and
during the daytime (7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.) hours.
Finding: RZ condition X44 limits construction to daytime hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m. It is infeasible due to social, economic and other con-
siderations to limit construction traffic to weekdays. A Statement of
Overriding Considerations has been adopted for any unmitigated effects asso-
ciated with permitting weekend construction traffic on public roads.
80. Mitigation: Muffle and maintain construction and transport equipment.
Finding: RZ condition #24 requires muffling In accordance with state and
federal standards.
81. Mitigation: Use of power construction equipment equipped with state-of-the-
art noise shielding and muffling devices.
Finding: These are not standard County requirements for construction acti-
vities. Construction and transport equipment will be muffled in accordance
with state and federal requirements.
82. Mitigation: Build an acoustical wall on the southern perimeter of the Vista
San Ramon subdivision. Design should coordinate with that subdivision
homeowners association.
Finding: RZ condition X26 requires construction of an acoustical barrier.
ENERGY
83. Mitigation: Apply current state requirements for construction. The current
edition of the Uniform Building Code Includes a number of requirements for
energy conservation, with emphasis on roof and wall Insulation. All new
residential construction in the state is required to meet minimum energy
conservation standards set forth in Title 24 of the California
Administrative Code.
Finding: RZ condition #12D requires compliance with the UBC and Title 24.
84. Mitigation: In addition to UBC and Title 24 requirements, the following
mitigation measures should be considered.
The applicant should commission the preparation of a set of project-
specific, energy-conservation development standards subject to review by P G
and E and approval by the County. These standards should be included as
conditions of development approval and should be used as design-review cri-
teria by the County prior to the Issuance of building permits. The measures
listed below should be considered for inclusion in this set of standards:
-14-
00011.0
a) The most cost-effective method of conserving on-site energy use is
installation of building roof and wall insulation. Building design
should include insulation measures which provide ratings which substan-
tially exceed state requirements.
b) Design structures with sufficient glazing on the south side of
minimize solar heat gain and offset winter heat loss.
C) Plan deciduous trees with appropriate canopy heights and other
plantings along glazed, exposed building elevations to provide sun
screening in the summer and directed filtered sun in the winter, par-
ticularly along southerly and southwesterly exposures.
d) Reduce the need for central air conditioning in the summer through
passive measures, including:
- adequate ventilation of living area.
- attic ventilation.
- shading of east, west, and south windows, and east and west walls
(roof overhangs, arbors, awnings, and/or trees).
e) Install solar water heating systems with all swimming pools.
f) Provide for maximum use of natural light in building designs
through optimum placement of window and skylights, and through provi-
sion of light-colored ceiling and wall surfaces.
g) Include plans for outdoor lighting consideration for an optimal
balance between public safety and security requirements and energy con-
servation.
h) Install sodium-vapor lamps for all street, parking lot, and park
lighting. Retain a lighting engineer to design all Interior and
exterior lighting for maximum efficiency to reduce overall lighting
requirements. These measures would reduce the electricity required for
project lighting substantially.
i) Offer options to homebuyers for active solar water and space
heaters. The project site is well suited for solar applications, and
this measure would substantially reduce the project's dependence on and
use of natural gas.
J) Design the project for natural gas ranges, furnaces, stoves, and
clothes dryers, rather than electric ones. Where installed, electric
appliances are necessary, they should be selected on the basis of
energy efficiency. This measure would reduce unnecessary use of high-
quality electrical energy for end uses that could be served by low-
quality thermal energy.
k) Use light-colored finish materials for roofs and exterior walls to
reflect heat from structures, reducing cooling requirements.
00011. 1
Finding: The preceding mitigation measure has been considered and deter-
mined infeasible due to social, economic and other considerations. A
Statement of Overriding Consideration_ s has been adopted for any unmitigated
effects associated with not requiring the applicant to commission new stan-
dards.
PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Finding: It is infeasible, due to social economic and other considerations,
to adopt the Project Alternatives listed on pages 151 through 159 of the
DEIR. Statements of overriding considerations have been adopted for each
alternative and are incorporated herein by reference.
SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The following consists of a listing of the Significant Irreversible
Environmental Changes and findings made for each change.
1. Change: "The development will require construction of one and possibly two
major water tanks. Residents' wastewater would consume 296 of the existing
capacity of the treatment plant which would In turn contribute to the need
for the pending expansion of that plant's capacity."
Finding: The construction of two major water tanks, and expansion of
wastewater treatment plant capacity are within the responsibility and juris-
diction of EBMUD and the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District. These
agencies have policies and programs to provide capacity and to guard against
growth inducement.
2. Change: "The school children from the project could require construction of
a new elementary school and will intensify the need for a second inter-
mediate school in the local planning area."
Finding: Permanent school housing is the responsibility of the State of
California. RZ condition X27 provides for acquisition of an elementary
school site and payment of "bedroom taxes" for interim school facilities.
It is infeasible, due to economic, social and other considerations, to
require Canyon Lakes to provide for construction of all school facilities
needed to serve Canyon Lakes students. A Statement of Overriding
Considerations has been adopted.
3. Change: "The development would contribute to the major traffic load coming
to bear on the local network of streets and arterial roads resulting from
Industrial and residential growth. The traffic increase In unavoidable and
will add to the need for major traffic improvementts. Developer "fair
share" contributions will assist in construction of improvements.
Findings: RZ conditions #50 through 79 have been required In the project to
provide construction of onsite traffic Improvements and "fair share"
contributions to the cost constructing off-site traffic improvements.
-16-
0.00 ,119
16000, 1 ?
4. Change: "Development in the foothills would cause permanent degradation
of existing views from the affected view shed. This impact has been mini-
mized by conserving ridgelines, by tightly clustering housing and by proper
siting. However, the scope of the project is such that the fundamental
sense of urban extension onto the site cannot be avoided."
Finding: RZ conditions #9 through 13 have been required in the project to
provide for future review of building landscape design, with condition !OD
specifically referencing additional efforts to further mitigate off-site
visual impacts. The project proposal as approved subject to conditions will
mitigate visual Impacts to the extent feasible, given development of the
site in accordance with the General Plan. See Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
5. Change: "About 1,050 acres of functioning grazing and hay producing land
would be permanently lost, as would the site's open space value."
Finding: As proposed, Canyon Lakes will include 600 acres of open space
and recreation area. It is Infeasible due to social economic and other
considerations to permanently preserve the 1,050 acre site for agricultural
purposes. See Statement of Overriding Considerations.
6. Change: "Riparian habitats on site would be altered and lost to a degree."
Finding: The project proposal incorporates plans for re-establishment of
riparian habitats after site grading. However, the temporary loss of habi-
tat prior to re-establishment, as well as any permanent alteration in habi-
tat value are environmental effects which are infeasible to mitigate due to
social economic and other considerations. See Statement of Overriding
Considerations.
-17-
0001 3
EXHIBIT B
FURTHER RESPONSES AND FINDINGS RELATING TO COMMENTS TO DEIR
The following responses and findings are made to and for the comments received
upon the Canyon Lakes Draft EIR, as those comments are lited in pages 2 through
22 of the portion of the Final. EIR entitled "ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
RESPONSES TO COMMENTS" dated June 1984. Each of the following findings is
jointly cross-referenced, by comment and by finding number, to the previous
listing of commentators and comment numbers. For each measure, comment or con-
cern, see also Exhibit C which is incorporated herein by reference.
NOTE: To repeat, finding numbers set forth below correspond to comment
numbers previously assigned in the initial response to DEIR comments.
Department of the Army, San Francisco District Corps of Engineers
Finding 1: The comment asserts the possible jurisdiction of the Department
and does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does not iden-
tify a signficant effect or a mitigation measure not included in
the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR, inclu-
des a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of Contra
Costa decision makers with information which enables them to make
a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental con-
sequences. RZ conditions #80 through 91 have been required in the
project to minimize and detain runoff.
California Regional Water Quality Control Board - San Francisco Bay Region
Finding 1: RZ condition #87 has been required in the project to insure
preparation of an erosion and sediment control plan.
Finding 2: The comment asserts jurisdiction and does not question the ade-
quacy of the EIR, and does not identify a signficant effect or a
mitigation measure not included in the Draft EIR.
State of California Department of Conservation
Finding 1: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient . degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible due to social, economic and other considerations,
to dissaprove Canyon Lake in order to further mitigate the effects
if any, upon agricultural use of the Shapell property to the east
-1-
A
0001. 1.4,
beyond the buffers established under the general plan, the
agreement with POS and 2218 RZ. A Statement of Overriding
Considerations has been prepared for the direct and indirect
impacts of cancellation.
Finding 2: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a signficant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
State of California, Department of California Highway Patrol
Finding 1: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a signficant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide the CHP and
the County of Contra Costa decision makers with Information which
enables them to make a decision which Intelligently takes account
of environmental consequences.
CHP personnel requirements are within the responsibility of the
CHP and other public agencies and not of Contra Costa. The
responsible agencies should adopt measures for personnel require-
ments.
Finding 3: Evaluation, implementation and enforcement of ramp metering
systems is outside the responsibility and jurisdiction of Contra
Costa County. ' If systems are installed by Caltrans, the respon-
sible public agencies should provide enforcement requirements.
Finding 4: CHP deployment patters and needs are outside the responsibility
and jurisdiction of Contra Costa County. The CHP or other respon-
sible public agency should adopt mitigation measures for CHP
deployment patterns and needs.
Finding 5: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-'
mental consequences and other agencies affected can and should
adopt all measures to adjust to this project.
State of California, Department of Transportation
Finding 1 s The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #50 through 79 have been
required in the project to mitigate traffic Impacts.
-2-
000 15 .
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
Regional information has been compiled in the form of the Tri-
Valley Study which is being constantly supplemented by additional
work. Irrespective of regional studies, the need for traffic
diagrams in this EIR is greatly diminished by the fact that
planning, funding and actual construction of improvements to I-680
interchanges, including Bollinger Canyon Road, Norris Canyon Road,
Sycamore Valley Road and Crow Canyon Road is well under way. RZ
conditions #72, 74, 75 and 78 have been required in the project to
insure that Canyon Lakes makes a fair share contribution to the
cost of mitigating the project's impact upon I-680 interchanges.
RZ conditions X72, 73, 74, 75 and 78 have been required in the
project to mitigate impacts upon I-680 interchanges. A full
corridor study for I-680 is within the joint responsibility of
CalTrans, MTC and Contra Costa County and is under way.
Findings
3 & 4: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a signficant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Findings
1, 2 do 3: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure. See also Finding #2 to Department
of Transportation comment.
Findings
4, 5 do 6: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure. See also Finding #2 to Department
of Transportation comment.
Finding 7: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
-3-
0001-16
Bay Area Air Quality Management District
Findings
1 do 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not Identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure. The ABAG Environmental Management
Plan contemplates population shifts/growth in the San Ramon area
of which Canyon Lakes is part. The ABAG Environmental Management
Plan does not include land use controls, but efforts to balance
jobs/housing are encouraged.
San Ramon Unified School District
Findings
1, 2 do 3: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR. RZ condition #27 has been required in
the project to allow the District to secure an elementary school
site.
Finding 4: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible, due to social, economic and other considerations
to require Canyon Lakes to provide a financial gift of the type
agreed to by developers of land within the Sycamore Valley Plan
area. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted
in response to any unmitigated effect relating to Canyon Lakes not
fully funding construction of new schools sufficient to accommo-
date the number of students anticipated in Canyon Lakes.
Alameda County Library System
Finding: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. -
It is infeasable, due to social, economic and other con-
siderations, to require Canyon Lakes to establish a library or
participate in a non-existent program for "developer fees". A
Statement of Overriding Considerations' has been adopted in
response to any unmitigated effect relating to Canyon Lakes not
establishing a new library facility or not participating in a non-
.existent program of developer fees. RZ condition #28 has been
-4-
000117
I 7
required in the project to allow examination of the feasibility of
designating a library site within Canyon Lakes Area H.
San Ramon Chamber of Commerce
Finding: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
Included in the Draft EIR.
Bay Area Council
Finding: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
San Ramon Homeowners Association
Finding 1: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
Finding 3: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Canyon Lakes Project Team
General: Except as noted, the Board of Supervisors concurs with the
Analysis submitted by the Canyon Lakes Project Team.
Finding 1 : The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not Identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: The response, 'together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions 041 through 49 have been
required in the project to mitigate geologic and soils impacts.
Finding 3: RZ condition #88 has been required In the project to require Lake
Management Plan submittal prior to final map.
-S-
: 00011. 8
Finding 4: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
Included in the Draft EIR.
RESPONSES TO PUBLIC HEARING COMMENTS MAY, 1984
Canyon Lakes Group
Finding l: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ condition #15 has been required in the
project to incorporate the developer's proposal as accepted by the
Planning Commission.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ condition #27 has been required In the
project to allow for alternative use of the school site.
Findings
3 do 4: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 5: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes_ account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #75, 76 and 78 have been
required in the project to allow for extension of Crow Canyon Road
to Camino Tassajara.
Finding 6: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
Tony Stepper, San Ramon Valley Unified School District
Finding l: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: RZ condition #27 has been required In the project to stipulate the
site be graded.
-6-
.0 0 0
6 .000 119
Tony Stepper, Area Resident
Finding 1: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
RZ conditions 017 and 27 have been required in the project to
allow for provision of active playing fields within the project.
A soft ball field is proposed as a part of the project.
Dan Mount, Vista San Ramon Resident
Finding 1: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible due to social and other considerations to realign
Bollinger Canyon Road from the proposed location which conforms to
the north Dougherty Hills General Pian Amendment. A Statement of
Overriding Considerations has been adopted for not realigning
Bollinger from the proposed location. RZ condition #26 has been
required in the project to require construction of an acoustical
barrier.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeabible, due to economic, social and other con-
siderations, to require a lower density project. A Statement of
Overriding Considerations has been adopted for not requiring a
lower density project.
Mr. Koplo, Vista San Ramon Resident
Finding 1: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ condition NOD, 11, 12A and 13 have been
reuqired in the project to allow further review of visual Impacts.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
-7-
000 -1.20
mental consequences. RZ condition #51 has been required in the
project to provide for construction of an 80-foot wide four lane
road, within a 100-foot right-of-way (not a 6-lane road).
William Hill, Vista San Ramon Resident
Finding l: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
RZ conditions #IOD, 11, 12A and 13 have been required in the
project to allow for further review of visual impacts. RZ con-
dition #26 has been required in the project to provide for an
acoustical barrier.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
RZ conditions #50 through 79 have been required in the project to
provide for full mitigation of traffic impacts through a program
which will result in construction of improvements. Given
construction of improvements, further mitigation by a TSM Plan are
not warranted.
Leslie Stewart, League of Women Voters of Diablo Valley
Finding l: The comment does not question the adequacy._of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make , a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The general plan Final EIR deals with
assessment of regional housing needs and this assessment is incor-
porated here.
Finding 3: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #SO through 79 have been
required in the project to provide for full mitigation of traffic
impacts by a program which will result in construction of improve-
ments to streets and highways. Given construction of .these
improvements additional mitigation by mass transit Is not
warranted.
-8-
00012.1
Bill Cardinale, Alamo Resident
Finding l: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. ' The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not contained in the Draft EIR.
Mr. Dockery, President, San Ramon Chamber of Commerce
Finding l: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR.
Dan Mount, Vista San Ramon Resident
Finding l: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible, due to economic, social and other considerations
to realign Bollinger Canyon Road from the proposed location which
conforms to the north Doughterty Hills General Plan Amendment. A
Statement of Overriding Consideratoins has been adopted for not
realigning Bollinger Canyon Road. RZ condition #26 has been
required in the project to provide for an acoustical and landscape
barrier to mitigate the Impact of the proposed alignment of
Bollinger Canyon Road.
Commissioner Viets
Findings
1, 2 do 3: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible, due to economic, social and other con-
siderations, to require Canyon Lakes to cover the costs of school
construction, to a degree greater than that reuqired of other
developers. A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been
adopted for any unmitigated effects associated with not requiring
Canyon Lakes to fully fund construction of new schools sufficient
to accommodate the number of students anticipated in Canyon Lakes.
RZ condition X27 has been required in the project to provide for
payment of adopted "bedroom taxes" and allow for acquisition of an
elementary school site.
-9-
. 000122 n'
Finding 4: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible due to social, economic and other considerations
to require Canyon Lakes to provide preschool facilities or ser-
vices.
A Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted for not
requiring Canyon Lakes to mitigate effects of pre-schoolers. RZ
condition X28 requires an examination of the feasibility of
designating a pre-school site within the Hotel/Clubhouse Area H.
Finding 5: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not contained in the Draft EIR.
Finding 6: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
RZ conditions #17 and 27 have been required in the project to pro-
vide for active playing fields. A softball field is proposed as a
part of the project. RZ conditions #14 and 15 have been required
in the project to require compliance with the county's parkland
dedication ordinance which generates in lieu- fees for public park
purposes.
Finding 7: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
RZ condition #12E has been required In the project to allow addi-
tional review of recreational facilities for the Canyon Park
Neighborhood I which includes the park referenced in the comment.
RZ conditions #14 and 15 have been required In the project to
require compliance with the county's Parkland Dedication Ordinance
which generates In lieu fees for public park purposes.
Finding 8: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
-10-
OQ
mental consequences. The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 9: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
RZ condition #12E has been required in the project to allow for
further review of recreation facilities within all condominium
areas. RZ conditions #14 and 15 have been required in the project
to require compliance within Parkland Dedication Ordinance which
generates in lieu fees for public park purposes.
Findings
10 & 11: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not Included in the Draft EIR.
Finding 12 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible, due to economic, social and other considerations
to require Canyon Lakes to conform to building code criteria more
restrictive than that currently adopted by the County. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted for not
requiring Canyon Lakes to develop new construction standards rela-
tive to earthquake shaking.
Finding 13 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It Is infeasible due to economic, social and other consideratins,
to require Canyon Lakes to provide long term funding or bonding to
mitigate future problems that may develop, due to economic and
other considerations. A Statement of Overriding Considerations
has been adopted for not requiring Canyon Lakes to provide long-
term funding or bonding to protect future buyers.
Finding 14 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
-11-
� 'C'J
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #80-91 have been required in
the project to mitigate off-site drainage impacts.
Finding 15 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #9 through 13 have been
required in the project to provide for Design Review.
Finding 16 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #50 through 79 have been
required in the project to provide for traffic improvements which
will not defeat the goal of reducing the impact upon Alcosta
Boulevard south.
Finding 17 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ condition #12c has been required in the
project to provide for recreational vehicle parking.
Finding 18 The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
Includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not- identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not included in the Draft EIR.
Commissioner Stone
Finding 1: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with Information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. RZ conditions #50 through 79 have been
required in the project to speed traffic flow and thereby minimize
Canyon Lake's contribution to degradation of air quality.
Finding 2: The comment does not question the adequacy of the EIR, and does
not identify a significant effect or a mitigation measure not
included in the Draft EIR. Bike paths and trails are proposed in
the project. RZ conditions #12H and 12I have been required in the
project to insure adequate connection of on-site trails to off-
site sidewalks and bus stops.
-12-
000125
Commissioner Whitney
Finding 1: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences. The comment does not Identify a significant
effect or a mitigation measure not included In the Draft EIR.
Finding 2: The response, together with the remainder of the Final EIR,
includes a sufficient degree of analysis to provide County of
Contra Costa decision makers with information which enables them
to make a decision which Intelligently takes account of environ-
mental consequences.
It is infeasible, due to social, economic and other considerations
to require Canyon Lakes to provide a library on the site. A
Statement of Overriding Considerations has been adopted for not
requiring Canyon Lakes to construct a library or participate in
developer-fees which ahve not been established by the county. RZ
condition #28 has been required in the project to allow future
examination of the feasibility of designating a library site
within Area H.
-13-
0 0 0 1 12 6
13000126
EXHIBIT C
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
RELATING TO
DEIR MITIGATION MEASURES, COMMENTS TO THE DEIR
AND
CANCELLATION OF WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACTS
1. Cancellation of Williamson Act contracts: The Board of Supervisors has
read and considered the report of the Director of Planning and hereby adopts it
here as its own.
The cancellation of Land Conservation Contracts 20-75 (1945 RZ) and 21-75
(1944-RZ) is essential to early construction of the Canyon Lakes project, which
in turn, is essential to the County's objective of improving the jobs-housing
balance within the San Ramon Valley area.
Currently scheduled tenants for buildings under construction at the Bishop Ranch
Business Park (BRBP) are expected to bring 15,000 employees to the area within
the immediate future. (See Appendix A Socioeconomic Analysis of the DEIR).
Given the 1984 supply of housing these jobs can create an immediate negative
imbalance of jobs and housing. By 1995, an additional 25,000 jobs are projected
for the vicinity.
Considered among all planned housing developments, Canyon Lakes is particularly
well situated to improving the jobs-housing balance within the valley, by virtue
of the following attributes:
(a) Proiect size: Canyon Lakes can provide 3090 dwelling units. This
number of units can have a significant positive effect upon improving
the jobs-housing balance.
(b) Timing: The Canyon Lakes developer is anxious to proceed. Further,
the Plan conforms to 'adopted General Plan designations, and the project
has already completed the time-consuming processes for approval of
water service, approval of sewage service, environmental clearance,
zoning approval and tentative map approval. Other housing projects
could be delayed for years while completing these processes and the
present intend of those applicants are not as clear.
(c) Proximity to BRBP: Canyon Lakes's proximity to BRBP not only will
allow employees the amenity of brief commute times, but also will
result In substantial reductions in the traffic and air quality Impacts
which would result from a housing project located elsewhere.
Given Its attributes, Canyon Lakes is the right project, In the right place and
at the right time. If the Canyon Lakes land conservation contracts were not
cancelled the project would be substantially delayed and subsequent housing
demand would outstrip the local supply. Furthermore, local streets and I-680
would experience greater traffic impacts If Canyon Lakes housing Is delayed, due
-1-
000127
to the fact that BRBP employees would be forced to live In projects more distant
from BRBP and thereby be forced to travel greater distances and rely more
heavily upon I-680 as a commute route.
The delay of Canyon Lakes could also delay reimbursement for improvements to
I-680 interchanges, due to the fact that Canyon Lakes' traffic Impact fees would
not be paid. The need for I-680 improvements will exist irrespective of comple-
tion of Canyon Lakes, and the Canyon Lakes impact fees are part of the planned
financing for early construction of these improvements.
Delay of or disapproval of the Williamson Act contracts cancellation will essen-
tially result in the "No Project" alternative described on page 151 of the DEIR,
and would cause the negative effects identified in the discussion of that alter-
native.
Notices of non-renewal were filed for the land conservation contracts In 1981,
and the- contracts will expire in 1991 irrespective of whether immediate can-
cellation is approved by the County. Therefore, conversion from agricultural
use will occur in 1991 irrespective of the current request, and the current
request has only the effect of accelerating the time at which the impacts, If
any, occur.
The Canyon Lakes project proposal includes provisions for protection of and buf-
fering of agricultural land uses on adjacent properties. Open space buffers,
100 to 200 or more feet wide have been provided adjacent to the Shapell pro-
perty, pursuant to an agreement reached between the applicant and People for
Open Space. Additionally, 75 + acres of land located at the easternmost end of
the site are not proposed for development, and will be offered to the East Bay
Regional Parks District as open space.
Given the foregoing considerations and those stated separately as findings pre-
cedent to cancellation of contracts 20-75 and 21-75 the Board of Supervisors
finds it infeasible to delay the Canyon Lakes project by delaying the Immediate
cancellation. The Board finds further that any unmitigated effect associated
with immediate cancellation is acceptable.
2. School needs. It is infeasible to require Canyon Lakes to fully fund
the construction of new schools beyond fulfilling the requirements of the
County's School Facilities Dedication Ordinance and providing a school site,
pursuant to the conditions of approval.
The construction of new schools Is typically funded by a variety of sources and
are not typically funded by a single development project. Funding sources
available to the district include state agencies and district tax revenues.
If Canyon Lakes were required to pay "development fees" at a level sufficient to
fully fund the construction of new schools, the cost of Canyon Lakes housing
would be Increased. Applied solely to Canyon Lakes, the fees could place Canyon
Lakes in a competitive disadvantage with other development projects which had
not been required to pay the fees. Higher housing costs will reduce the afford-
ability of Canyon Lakes units, reduce the ability of the project to fulfill the
housing demands of employees of the BRBP and consequently diminish the Canyon
Lakes ability to improve the jobs-housing balance* within the Valley.
-2-
60 01 2.8
Development fees will be passed on to homebuyers and tenants in the form of
higher prices and rents. As such, development fees force homebuyers and renters
to pay for public facilities and services through prices and rents In addition
to paying all taxes. If Canyon Lake's development fees are high enough to fully
fund construction of new schools, then Canyon Lakes' residents will be funding
schools construction at greater levels than the residents of other projects for
which schools have been funded by sources other than development fees. By using
district tax revenues and state monies, a school district spreads the cost of
schools to a wider tax base and more taxpayers than the residents of one pro-
ject. Since pre-Canyon Lakes schools have been financed from other sources,
pre-Canyon Lakes residents have benefited from utilizing wider tax bases and
Canyon Lakes residents should not be denied the same benefits.
If Canyon Lakes fully funds construction of new schools, there will be no
need for the San Ramon Valley School District (SRVSD) to seek available state
funds. In this event, the state will be free to use available monies for
schools elsewhere in the state. In this way Canyon Lakes residents would be, in
effect, inequitably subsidizing statewide school construction.
The SRVSD calculated the number of students expected from Canyon Lakes and then
determined that approximately $10.5 million would be required to construct new
schools for the anticipated students. The District has not, however,
demonstrated that Canyon Lakes students cannot be housed in existing schools by
changing attendance boundaries or by enlarging existing schools. The Board of
Supervisors expects that the number of Canyon Lakes students may necessitate
some new construction, but is has not been adequately demonstrated that Canyon
Lakes will necessitate construction of specific school facilities which will
cost $10.5 million.
The Imposition of development fees for school construction has been the subject
of state legislation and lawsuits. It Is not clear that the County has the
legal authority to require payment of development fees which will be used for
purposes other than the construction of interim facilities.
The SRVSD has accepted an offer of the Canyon Lakes applicant to grant $25,000
toward a preparing study of District needs and as well assist the District In
seeking state monies and reasonable increases to development fees.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds that the
Canyon Lakes project, as approved subject to conditions and subject to the
applicant's offer to the District, will mitigate to the extent feasible, the
significant effects associated with schools needs. The Board further finds that
any remaining unmitigated effects are acceptable and is fully able to consider a
moratorium If the "worse case" actually materializes.
3. Police Services. It Is infeasible to mitigate the effects upon police
service by requiring Canyon Lakes to participate with other developers in the
area In the dedication and construction of a protective services facility under
an undefined program and without a showing that tax revenues are not adequate to
provide public protection.
The County of Contra Costa has not adopted a program by which such a requirement
-3-
000129
can be made. Such a program will entail an examination of the existing facili-
ties and needs of the Sheriff's office and the police departments of Danville
and San Ramon. Further, annexation of Canyon Lakes to either the City of San
Ramon or Danville would eliminate any benefits to Canyon Lakes residents of
having a new Sheriff's facility.
The construction of protective services facilities has traditionally been funded
by tax revenues and other sources, and not traditionally funded by development
fees or exactions. Funding construction by development exactions would
Increase costs to the developer and subsequently increase housing prices and
rents. If such exactions were applied to Canyon Lakes alone, the Canyon Lakes
developer would be placed in a competitive disadvantage with other projects and
project residents would be inequitably funding facilities and services by paying
higher housing costs.
However, given the fact that Canyon Lakes may annex to a city, and given the
fact that Danville or San Ramon may find the Canyon Lakes site appropriate for a
police station, RZ condition #28 requires that the feasibility of a law enforce-
ment facility within Canyon Lakes Neighborhood H be examined prior to County
approval of plans for Neighborhood H.
Due to the foregoing considerations the Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon
Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, mitigates to the extent feasible the
significant affects associated with protective services. The Board further
finds that any remaining unmitigated effect Is acceptable.
4. Library Services. It is infeasible to require Canyon Lakes to
establish an additional library or pay development fees therefor.
Library facilities are traditionally funded by service area taxpayers and other
sources. If an additional facility were funded solely by the Canyon Lakes pro-
ject, then the residents of Canyon Lakes would be unfairly funding library ser-
vices in comparison to residents of other developments -which had not been
required to fund a library facility. The establishment of a development fee
should be considered within the context of an area-wide program In which due
consideration has been given to: the magnitude of need for library facilities;
the best location for any needed facility; the number of potential funding
sources and; the equity of funding libraries by development fees which are borne
by homebuyers and renters.
However, the Canyon Lakes Hotel/Clubhouse Area H Is relatively centrally located
within the San Ramon Valley and may be appropriate for a future library site.
RZ condition #28 requires an examination of the feasibility of designating a
library site In Area H.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds the Canyon
Lakes project, as approved subject to conditions, will mitigate to the extent
feasible significant affects associated with library. needs. The Board further
finds that any remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
S. Allocation of Park Fees: It is infeasible to allocate, as a part of the
approval process for Canyon Lakes, In-lieu fees for development of nearby sites
(e.g., Vista San Ramon Park).
-4-
0.00 .30
Pursuant to County ordinances and policy, park dedication fees are paid into a
fund from which monies can be allocated for a variety of parks 'purposes within
the County-wide area. Funds are allocated after examining all needs in the
area. If, as a part of project approval, Canyon Lakes fees were slated for a
specific park use, then the normal allocation process would be circumvented, and
the competing needs at distant parks would not be fairly considered. Canyon
Lakes' park dedication fees should be allocated within the normal process.
The Canyon Lakes proposal Includes extensive active recreation areas including a
softball field. RZ conditions #14 and 15 require Canyon Lakes to pay in lieu
fees. RZ condition #27 requires Canyon Lakes to provide 4 acres of improved
play field within the proposed school site and requires that the entire 10-acre
school site be offered for parks purposes In the event It is not accepted for
school purposes. RZ condition #17 provides for a possible additional public
play field site at the northern end of the project.
Due to the foregoing considerations the Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon
Lakes, as approved by conditions, will mitigate to the extent feasible the
significant effects associated with needs for park Improvements. The Board
further finds that any remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
6. Preservation of Knoll in Area H. It is Infeasible to preserve the
screening function of the existing knoll in the Hotel/Clubhouse Area H by
revising grading plans to preserve the knoll Itself.
Preservation of the knoll would result in minimal visual relief and would cause
a significant loss of buildable land within Area H. This loss would diminish
the economic viability of the project as a whole and will result In higher
housing prices and rents if prices and rents must be Increased to recapture the
land value lost in preserving the knoll. Higher prices and rents will reduce
the affordability of housing and frustrate the County's objective of improving
the jobs-housing balance.
The loss of the knoll's moderate screening function can be adequately mitigated
by attention to the design of buildings and landscaping which will occupy the
site. Such mitigation can be reviewed during future approval of development
plans for area H. Further review and approval is required by RZ conditions #3
and IOD.
Due to the foregoing considerations the Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon
Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, mitigates to the extent feasible the
significant effects associated with the screening function of the knoll. The
Board further finds that any remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
7. Twelve M.P.H. Winds. It Is infeasible to limit grading operations to
periods during which winds do not exceed 12 m.p.h.
The site is commonly exposed to easterly winds In excess of 12 m.p.h.
Suspension of grading when winds exceed 12 m.p.h. Is impossible if grading is to
be accomplished in the shortest possible time. Rapid completion of grading is
essential to economical construction and as well, to minimize the period that
neighbors would be disturbed by noise and other effects of grading operations.
-S-
000-11-31.
The easterly winds will tend to blow dust away from nearby neighbors because
existing homes lie westerly of Canyon Lakes and undeveloped land lies easterly
of Canyon Lakes.
RZ condition #48 requires preparation of a program to minimize generation of
dust. Such a program will include typical and feasible mitigation measures,
such as sprinkling of graded areas.
Due to the foregoing considerations the Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon
Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, will mitigate to the extent feasible
the significant effects of dust generation. The Board further finds that any
remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
8. Weekend Suspension of Construction Traffic. It Is infeasible to prohi-
bit weekend construction traffic on public roads for the purpose of reducing
noise levels.
It is the desire of the Board of Supervisors to complete the construction of
Canyon Lakes in the shortest feasible time period. Early completion will reduce
the period during which neighbors may be disturbed by construction activity.
Early completion will improve the ability of Canyon Lakes to meet the Imminent
housing needs of BRBP employees, and thereby improve the jobs-housing balance
and minimize BRBP traffic impacts. Limiting of construction traffic to weekdays
only will tend to delay completion of Canyon Lakes.
RZ condition #44 will limit construction traffic to daytime hours of 7:00 a.m.
to 5:00 p.m. and thereby reduce noise impacts during evening and nighttime
hours.
Due to the foregoing considerations the Board of Supervisors finds the Canyon
Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, will mitigate to the extent feasible
the significant effects associated with noise from construction traffic on
public roads. The Board further finds that any remaining unmitigated effect is
accep table.
9. Additional Energy Standards. It is infeasible to require Canyon Lakes
to prepare project-specific energy conservation standards.
Energy conservation standards for new construction exist in the form of the
requirements of the UBC and Title 24. The existing standards have been de-
veloped by governmental agencies following years of research, testing, public
review and refinement. It is not standard County practice to require a single
development project such as Canyon Lakes to supplement or revise already-adopted
code requirements.
There Is no evidence supporting the presumption that energy use within Canyon
Lakes will differ significantly from other developments which have and will be
built . pursuant to existing energy standards. Therefore, there is no basis for
imposing unique standards upon Canyon Lakes.
The preparation of project specific standards could delay construction of the
project and add construction costs to the project, both of which would frustrate
improvement of the jobs-housing balance.
-6-
0001. 2
To the extent that existing standards may ,be deficient, preparation of new stan-
dards is rightly the responsibility of government agencies and not the respon-
sibility of a single development project.
Due to the foregoing considerations the Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon
Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, will mitigate to the extent feasible
the significant effects associated with energy conservation. The Board further
finds that any remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
10. _Loss of grazing and hay producing land, and open space value. It is
infeasible to preserve the 1050-acre Canyon Lakes site for its grazing and hay
producing value and for its open space value.
Preservation of the site for these purposes would result In the undesirable
effects identified in Statement No. 1, "Cancellation of Williamson Act.
contracts."
As proposed, Canyon Lakes includes 600 acres of open space and recreation land
which will preserve substantial open space value. In addition, the project as
proposed preserves major ridgelines for their open space value.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon
Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, mitigates to the extent feasible the
loss of grazing and hay producing land and the loss of open space value. The
Board finds further that any unmitigated effect Is acceptable.
11. Loss or Alteration of Riparian Habitats. It Is infeasible to prevent
the temporary loss of riparian habitat and to prevent alteration of habitat
value.
Preservation of existing riparian habitat and the existing habitat value would
require that the site be preserved in its existing condition, thereby precluding
development of the Canyon Lakes project. Preservation of -the site would result
in the undesirable effects identified In Statement No. 1, "Cancellation of
Williamson Act contracts". Existing riparian habitat is minimal. The Canyon
Lake project will result in re-establishment of riparian habitat, after grading
has been completed and the re-established habitat will have more extensive vege-
tation than that which currently exists. The temporary loss of habitat will not
affect any rare or endangered species. Due to the foregoing considerations, the
Board of Supervisors finds that Canyon Lakes, as approved subject to conditions,
mitigates to the extent feasible the loss or alteration of riparian habitat.
12. Realignment of Bollinger Canyon Road. It Is infeasible to realign
Bollinger Canyon Road from the proposed alignment to one which runs southeast-
erly of neighborhood I.
The suggested realignment would conflict with the General Plan and would
require more grading than that proposed. The realignment would not mitigate
noise impacts upon the Vista San Ramon homes closest to Alcosta Boulevard
because the alignment Is fixed by the existing Bollinger/Alcosta Intersection.
RZ condition 026 requires an acoustical and landscape barrier be provided to
mitigate the Impacts of the proposed alignment.
-7-
000
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors find that
Canyon Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, will mitigate to the extent
feasible the significant -'effects associated with the proposed alignment of
Bollinger Canyon Road. The Board finds further than any remaining unmitigated
effect is acceptable.
13. Preschool Needs. It is Infeasible to require Canyon Lakes to provide
preschool facilities of project residents.
Provisions for preschool needs are the responsibility of parents and not
the responsibility of a developer or the County. If the developer were to pro-
vide preschool facilities or services, the costs would be inequitably passed on
to all project residents, including those who do not have children and those
whose might prefer alternative preschool services. Developer provision of ser-
vices could result In higher housing costs which would frustrate the County's
objectives of improving providing affordable housing and improving the jobs-
housing balance.
RZ condition $28 requires an examination be made of the feasibility of
designating a private day care site within Area H.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds that
Canyon Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, mitigates to the extent
feasible the preschool needs of project residents. The Board further finds that
any remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
14. Code Revisions Regarding Earthquakes. It Is infeasible to subject
Canyon Lakes to more stringent building code requirements than those already in
force.
Building code requirements have been adopted following years of research,
testing and public review. New standards, If any are warranted, would take
substantial time to prepare and could delay construction of Canyon Lakes. There
Is no evidence that the Canyon Lakes site is substantially different from other
hillside project sites which have not been subjected to additional standards.
In the event that building codes are modified prior to the buildout of
Canyon Lakes, any unconstructed units will be subject to the modified standards.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds that
Canyon Lakes, as approved subject to conditions, will mitigate to the extent
feasible the significant impacts associated with earthquake shaking. The Board
further finds that any remaining unmitigated effect Is acceptable.
13. Bonding for Potential Geologic Problems. It Is infeasible to require
Canyon Lakes to bond or establish long term funding to protect residents from
potential geologic problems.
Such a requirement could stop the project by using up the developers bonding
capacity.
Geologic problems will be mitigated by requiring the applicant to perform
all soils work under the supervision of the ' applicant's geotechnical consultant
and pursuant to County ordinance requirements.
4-
. A
000A: , :
Additional protection is available to individual property owners In the form
of insurance and other legal recourse under existing lacy. To require the deve-
loper to provide bonding would provide protection for all future property
owners, but would generate a cost which would be borne by all property owners.
Such a program Is not typically required for development projects and would
create a competitive disadvantage for Canyon Lakes. The additional cost of the
program could result in higher housing costs which would frustrate the County's
objective of providing affordable housing to improve the jobs-housing balance.
R7 conditions #41 through 49 require Canyon Lakes to comply with standard
geotechnical practices.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds that
Canyon Lakes is not geologically unique and, as approved subject to conditions,
mitigates to the extent feasible all geologic effects. The Board finds further
that any remaining unmitigated effect is acceptable.
16. Proiect Alternatives.
(a) No Proiect, No Action, Delay Alternative; Reduced Residential
Density Alternative. Adoption of these alternatives would frustrate the
County's General Plan and its objectives of providing affordable housing to
improve the jobs-housing balance within the Valley. The negative effects asso-
ciated with these alternatives are described in pages 153 and 154 of the Draft
EIR. The No Project, No Action, Delay Alternative would entail all the unde-
sirable effects identified in Statement #1 "Cancellation of Williamson Act
contracts" as described on page 1 of this Exhibit.
(b) Increased Residential Density Alternative. Adoption of this
alternative would result in higher incremental environmental Impacts as
described in pages 154 and 155 of the Draft EIR and could incur significant com-
munity resistance not now present.
(c) Land Use Relocation Alternative. Adoption of this alternative
would remove housing from Alcosta Boulevard sites which are attractive to
employees of the BRBP. The housing would be relocated to the area proposed for
Hotel/Clubhouse and related uses, resulting in less developable land reducing
the economic viability of the project. This proposal Is not consistent with the
general plan. Further, reducing the amount of developable land will result in
higher housing costs and subsequently frustrate the County's objective of pro-
viding affordable housing to improve the jobs-housing balance in the Valley.
(e) Non-residential Uses Alternatives. The non-residential uses
alternative as described on pages 158 and 159 of the DEIR, Is neither more nor
less advantageous than the project as proposed, but would provide less housing
than that proposed.
Due to the foregoing considerations, the Board of Supervisors finds the
Canyon Lakes, as proposed and modified by conditions of approval is superior to
the suggested Project Alternatives, * and the alternatives are hereby rejected.
The Board further finds that any remaining unmitigated effect associated with
not adopting the project alternatives Is acceptable.
-9-
00013 5 .
17. Cumulative Impacts. The San Ramon Valley Planning area, particularly
in the areas south of Danville, are undergoing rapid changes. The Final EIR for
North Dougherty Hill's General Plan Amendment (August 1982) evaluates the
situation as it then existed (see especially the "Responses to Comments" portion
of the EIR pages 1-17 and the Board of Superviors resolution).
The Draft Environmental Impact Report for "Canyon Lakes" (April 1984) updates
and further evaluates the, situation at pages 30-36 and 109-134. Since the Draft
EIR for Canyon Lakes has occurred the following added changes have occurred:
(a) The application for the Gomperts (or Daon) General Plan Amendment
has been dropped at the request of the applicant and with the support of staff;
(b) Environmental Impact Reports for The West Branch (June 1983),
Hansen Lane (September 1983) and Dougherty Valley (January 1984) General Plan
changes have been certified by the SRVAPC;
(c) Public hearings on all three General Plan changes have been closed
and all three matters are presently set for decision by the SRVAPC at its
meeting of July 11, 1984; and
(d) On June 18, 1984 the Alameda County Planning Commission recom-
mended approval of the Los Positas Master Plan (EIR published June 1982) and
that plan is awaiting hearings before the Alameda County Board of Supervisors.
The above mentioned General Plan changes are in a different category than Is
Canyon Lakes. Canyon Lakes is a detailed current project Implementing the
current General Plan and is consistent with the spheres of influence and poli-
cies of related sewer and water agencies. The pending general plan changes have
not been approved and if approved will be subject to independent project review
(including the formulation of precise conditions and other mitigation measures)
at the zoning stage. Further, several of the projects listed In the EIR
(Table S) are also subject to further plan review.
The practical reality is all projects listed may not be approved and built as
presented. The rate of build out of this and other projects will depend not
only upon agency approvals but upon external market or economic forces. The
test which Contra Costa County normally applies in reviewing projects of the
scope of Canyon lakes is to establish that the project will not have an un-
acceptable adverse effect on . the community (taken in the context of previously
approved projects) and will not Impose an unacceptable burden on community
infrastructure. As stated elsewhere, Canyon Lakes meets this test and its
Impacts have been mitigated to the extent feasible.
The Board of Supervisors and the public has and has had sufficient information
to understand the potential magnitude of the cumulative Impact of all projected
development and to make an informed decision regarding the merits of the Canyon
Lakes application and to formulate mitigation measures for Canyon Lakes within
Its development context. This, of course, does not mean that this Board can or
should approve all "planned" projects as presented or that It would not insist
upon the formulation of significant measures to mitigate the Impacts of each
project if approval is appropriate and is consistent with its general plan.
-10-
000136
EXHIBIT D
FINDINGS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 51282.1
CANCELLATION OF AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE
AND OF LAND CONSERVATION
CONTRACT NOS. 20-75 (1945 RZ) AND 21-75 (1944 RZ)
(WILLIAMSON ACT CANCELLATION)
This Board finds that said contract should be tentatively cancelled upon the
following grounds:
1. Prior to its action giving this tentative approval, the county assessor
determined the full cash value of the land as though it were free of the
contractual restrictions and certified to the Board the cancellation value as
required by Government Code Section 51283, and pursuant to Government Code
Section 51283(b) , it has determined and certified to the county auditor the can-
cellation fee which must be paid is $60,666 and $30,721, respectively;
2. A petition for cancellation was filed prior to May 31, 1982, in that on
May 28, 1982 the landowner by letter petitioned to cancel both contracts under
the provisions of Government Code Section 51282.1;
3. The proposed alternative use (2571 RZ), and Final Development Plan
(3041-83) , is consistent with the applicable provisions of the County General
Plan which had been amended after October 1, 1981, through proceedings which
were formally initiated prior to January 1, 1982 (the General Plan was amended
on December 7, 1982 - Resolution 82/1401 - North Dougherty Hills General Plan
Amendment which includes this project site);
4. The proposed alternate use will not result in discontiguous patterns of
urban development in that the Canyon Lakes project is consistent with and will
implement the applicable General Plan and is in harmony with-the urban develop-
ment policies of that plan as stated in SRVAPC (Resol. 34-1984(SR);
5. That as a condition of final cancellation, the cancellation fees
($58,892 and $29,823) will have been paid and that all permits needed to com-
mence development have been obtained.
6. That pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081, the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained in Exhibit C are made as to the environmen-
tal impact of the cancellation.
1
0001_ Q_>
ALTERNATIVE FINDINGS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 51282 -
CANCELLATION OF AGRICULTURAL PRESERVE AND LAND CONSERVATION
CONTRACT NOS. 20-75 (1945 RZ) and 21-75 (1944 RZ)
(WILLIAMSON ACT)
The Board finds:
1. The Supervisors' original decision to enter into the land conservation
contracts (both dated January 27, 1975) was supported by both the Planning Staff
and the Planning Commission;
2. The landowner has filed a written notice of non-renewal, February 27,
1981 , under the provisions of Government Code Section 51245. This notice
assures that these contracts will automatically expire February 19, 1991 unless
terminated earlier by cancellation provided by law;
3. It recognizes that non-renewal is the usual method of termination; that
cancellation may be allowed only if- unforeseen changes in circumstances have
occurred preventing reliance upon non-renewal and that the objectives sought to
be furthered by the cancellation can not be met by non-renewal. On February 26,
1981, the landowner delivered official notice of non-renewal of the two
contracts and on March of 1981, Chevron formally announced its plans to locate a
major employment center at Bishop Ranch Business Park (this step was followed by
similar announcement by "Pac Tel"). In addition starting in May 1981, the
County began to review the General Plan for the "North Dougherty Hills"
(including the entire Canyon Lakes project site). This amendment was adopted on
December 7, 1982. The immediate development of Bishop Ranch Bishop Park with
its currently expected tenant population of 15,000 persons demands an adjacent
residential project which will satisfy the County's required balance for jobs
and housing.
The objectives to be served by cancellation could not have been predicted or
served by non-renewal at any earlier time. Such objectives can be served only
by cancellation now. The pending unbalance between jobs and housing that will
occur if cancellation does not take place is a situation of extraordinary con-
cern for which non-renewal is no longer appropriate;
4. The public interest to be served by the cancellation is primarily local
housing needs and this interest outweighs the public interest in deferring deve-
lopment until 1991. While keeping these lands for open space and agricultural
use for seven more years would indeed serve important open space and agri-
cultural purposes, these values, because of the development of the BRBP should
be subordinated to the need for "affordable" housing. The goal of balancing
housing with jobs as evidenced in the general plan outweighs the interest of the
public as a whole in the value of the land for open space and agricultural use.
In addition, the alternative use does contain recreational and open space ameni-
ties in that it provides for 600 acres of open space and recreation area. The
Canyon Lakes plan is sensitive to open space and scenic values to the extent
feasible and also is sensitive to surrounding agricultural uses by providing
reasonable buffers and by lessening pressure to develop more remote sites. The
need for housing adjacent to the Bishop Ranch Business Park and to the other
2
A
r
areas in the growing San Ramon Valley substantially outweigh the need for open
space and agricultural purposes, therefore, this cancellation is in the public
interest;
5. Proximate (close enough to be considered a practical alternative)
alternative non-contract sites are not available for the use purposed under the
Canyon Lakes project. All planning and traffic studies show the need to develop
significant "affordable" housing stock to the east of Bishop Ranch Business Park
and this project meets this test. Given the close proximity of the site to
Bishop Ranch Business Park the opportunity to get people out of their cars can
not be missed and there is not enough non-contract land in the vicinity to even
begin to meet this planning goal. The record clearly shows that there is no
proximate alternative non-contract sites available for the use similar to the
use purposed under this project. The record further shows that the salient
features of the Canyon Lakes project, which will provide for 3,090 dwelling
units within a planned district including a variety of recreational amenities,
all located directly east of Bishop Ranch Business Park (resulting in improved
commute patterns), such that another parcel, or a combination of parcels more
remote, would not serve a substantially similar use as the Canyon Lakes parcel.
6. It recognizes that under Government Code Section 51282, the uneconomic
character of an existing agricultural use shall likewise not be sufficient
reason for cancellation of the contracts. This should only be done if the Board
first decides that there is no other economic agricultural use and then only if
it decides that there has been a significant change in circumstances since the
contracts were originally signed. The Board is aware of this consideration, but
it does not need to consider the uneconomic character of the agricultural use
now in existence. While the required findings to consider agricultural econo-
mics might be made, it is not clear if there is not some other agricultural use
to which the land may be put which is more comparable with the present rapid
urbanization of the surrounding area. The cancellation is based upon present
housing needs to arrive at the proper housing/job balance and not upon the lan-
downers understandable desire to realize a financial gain to a present sale to a
developer.
7 Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 , the Statement of
Overriding Considerations contained in Exhibit C are made as to these can-
cellations.
The Board further finds that these findings are made in the alternative and the
record supports both sets of findings.
3
0 0 �� _ 4
IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
CANYON LAKES: Approving )
Tentative Cancellation of )
Land Conservation Contracts ) Resolution # 84/407
20-75 (1945 RZ) and )
21-75 (1944 RZ) . )
WHEREAS, on July 5, 1984, the Board of Supervisors received a memo from the
Director of Planning transmitting, among other items, his report analyzing the
requested cancellation of Land Conservation Contracts 20-75 and 21-75 which
apply to the Canyon Lakes Project;
WHEREAS, after notice lawfully given for cancellation of Land Conservation
Contracts, a public hearing was held July 10, 1984 at 2:30 p.m. in the Board of
Supervisors Chambers in Martinez, California.
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors has considered the recommendations of the
staff and the testimony and documents referenced in the staff report;
WHEREAS, The Board of Supervisors gave tentative approval at its meeting of
July 10, 1984, subject to the final preparation of this resolution;
WHEREAS, by resolution 84/406 the Board of Supervisors on July 17, 1984,
approved the Canyon Lakes Project.
NOW THEREFORE, THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HEREBY RESOLVES, FINDS,
CERTIFIES AND ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:
1. Land Conservation Contracts Cancellation: The parcels of land covered
by Land Conservation Contracts 20-75 and 21-75 were impacted by urban develop-
ment more rapidly than anticipated, and these contracts now stand in the way of
orderly community development serving public housing and transportation needs as
set forth in the applicable County General Plan and therefore, Land Conservation
Contracts 20-75 and 21-75 are hereby cancelled upon the specific findings con-
tained in Exhibit D attached to Resolution 84/406 - Canyon Lakes (which is
incorporated herein by reference) and the Clerk of the Board shall record in the
office of the County Recorder a certificate of tentative cancellation and shall
implement an unconditional cancellation if the final cancellation under
Government Code Section 51282.1 is ineffective for any reason;
-1-
000 . 0
2. The Clerk of the Board shall issue and record the Certificate of
Tentative Cancellation pursuant to Government Code Section 51283.4.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of July, 1984, by the following votes:
Ayes: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder and Torlakson
Noes: None
Absent: Supervisor McPeak
i t4mby c"fy thatthis laa true end c~cow of
an *cWW taken and entered on the minutes of t!�
Baero of gupervbors an thoi dote 0"M
ATTESTED:
J.R. OLSSO ,CO NTV CLERK
and ON *Mdo Cleric of the ®oard
fly —.:-.... I tel►
cc: Director of Planning
County Counsel
Public Works Director
Daniel Van Voorhis
Page & Addison, Attorneys
-2-
7 '
000'. ,11.