Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03261985 - T.10 THE BOARD -OF SUPERVISORS OF.-CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, -CAL;IFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 26 , 1985 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Schroder , McPeak , Torlakson and Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Appeal of Alhambra Valley Improvement Association from the County Planning Commission's decision approving Subdivision No. 6487 (Stonehurst) Ferguson & Wollman (applicant) , and California Equity Fund (owner) in the Alhambra Valley/Martinez area . The Board on February 12, 1985 continued to this date its hearing on the appeal of the Alhambra Valley Improvement Association from the County Planning Commission' s decision approving Subdivision No . 6487 (Stonehurst) , Ferguson & Wollman (applicant) and California Equity Fund (owners) to divide 238 acres in General Agricultural District (A-2) and Single Family Residential District (R-40) into 47 lots in the Alhambra Valley/Martinez area. Mr . Harvey Bragdon, Assistant Director of Planning, commented that staff has concluded that every new unit created in the Alhambra Valley should pay its fair share of infrastructure costs needed to make development of the valley viable , and that , subject to such conditions , staff recommends approval of the subdivision; and that if it is the Board' s intention to pursue a specific plan for the Alhambra Valley, that each unit be required to participate in the financing , and that all future developments be subject to the same requirement . Chairwoman Fanden commented that that had been several meetings between the appellant , the applicant and owner , and staff to define the issues; and having invited those interested to com- ment , and the following persons appeared: Frank Hackett , 100 Deodora Way, requested a specific plan; and Richard Loewke , representing the Martinez City Council , endorsed the proposal for a specific plan, and expressed concern that water , drainage and traffic mitigations should be in place , and commented that the City' s long-term interest is in annexation of developing properties; and Harold L . Olson, representing the Alhambra Valley Improvement Association, urged approval of the proposal for a speci- fic plan, conditioned upon three concerns of the Association: ( 1 )that the infrastructure assessment figure be tied to an inflation index; (2) that Alhambra Valley Road remain 20 feet wide as it is now, rather than widening to 28 feet; and (3) that drop structures be incorporated in the culvert design to decrease erosion of the creek; and Gordon Strain, 5020 Alhambra Valley Road , rancher and pro- perty owner , advised that he was wholeheartedly against a specific plan, commenting that the ranchers are of the opinion that the General Plan covers every detail for development in the Alhambra Valley, and that he was not opposed to Stonehurst or any other pro- ject , and urged the Board to deny the request for a Specific Plan and support the General Plan adopted in 1982; and -1 - Frank Boyle , Inspector with the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District , urged the Board to require 28-foot wide roads necessary for emergency vehicles; but agreed on 20-foot wide roads with turnouts as recommended by the Planning Department; and Maurice Huguet , Alhambra Valley homeowner , declared sup- port for the concept of a Specific Plan because of the fragile nature of the Alhambra Valley; and Stuart Safine , attorney for the applicant and owner , advised that they had no objections to the revised conditions , complimented the Board and staff and the people in the area for their efforts and leadership in making the project work , and requested the Board to deny the appeal of the Alhambra Valley Improvement Association now that the issues have been resolved, noting that the specific plan was not before the Board at this time; and The Chairwoman then closed the hearing and thanked those who had worked so hard to resolve the issues of this appeal , and requested staff to come back with a time schedule for a specific plan. THE BOARD HEREBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: A. Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance . 1 . An Initial Study of Environmental Significance was prepared for this project identifying effects on the environment , but revisions in the project agreed to by the applicant avoided the effects or mitigated them to a point where clearly no significant effects , cumulative or otherwise , would occur . A Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance was therefore prepared , which included and referenced revisions in the project plans as mitigation measures . The proposed conditions of approval have required further revisions and improvement requirements in the pro- ject as further mitigation measures . 2. Before approving the project , the Board considered the Negative Declaration, the Initial Study and Appendix B, all com- ments received during the public hearing process and the proposed revisions to the project and the conditions of approval as recom- mended by the Contra Costa County Planning Commission and agreed to by the applicant and other revisions to conditions on this appeal that were also agreed to by the applicant . The Board approves the Negative Declaration, considering the foregoing and all other evi- dence before it , on the basis that there is no substantial evidence that the project may have a significant effect on the environment . 3. Changes or alterations have been incorporated in the project or improvement fees have been required of the project which mitigate or avoid any significant , cumulative or otherwise , environmental effects identified in the Initial Study. Such mitiga- tion is described in the Initial Study and is further provided for in the revised conditions of approval , all incorporated herein by reference as though set forth at length hereunder , and in particular as follows: a. Grading and erosion: The conditions of approval require in the development of each lot that grading be minimized, with the use of crib walls where necessary, and the provision of adequate drainage . An erosion protection plan must be approved . Prompt revegetation using natural , drought resistant vegetation is required . Streets are to be no more than 20 feet in width and grading used shall achieve a natural rounded appearance with the use of crib walls where necessary. -2- b . Water runoff and siltation: The conditions of approval require construction of a regional water detention basin and drainage control system. Water runoff mitigation measures include the construction of drop structures at creek crossings where the creek has sufficient capacity. c . Geology and soils: The conditions of approval require the minimizing of grading and erosion and , in addition, the direction of runoff away from unstable areas . It is further required that the recommendations in a detailed preliminary geologic and design-level soils report for subdivision improvements be followed . d . Fire hazard: The conditions of approval require an adequate public water system and tank capacity for fire protec- tion purposes , specific fire protection measures on each lot , and provision of a fire station site or contribution toward construction of a new fire station , equipment and other resources to allow for faster emergency response . The roads proposed are sufficiently wide for passage of fire equipment and vehicles . e . Water supply: The conditions of approval require public water to be supplied to the project and use of leach fields with adequate slope and percolation, consistent with the standards of the Department of Health, so as to avoid contamination of other wells in the area . f . General Plan considerations: The goals and poli- cies of particular elements of the General Plan, including but not limited to Open Space Conservation, Scenic Routes , Safety and Fire Protection Elements , are satisfied given revisions in the project and the conditions of approval . In addition, the project is otherwise consistent with the 1982 General Plan Amendment for the greater Alhambra Valley Area. To avoid the possibility that cumulative impacts based on future development may result in inconsistencies with the General Plan, the applicant has agreed to participate in the funding of an immediate Specific Plan review of the Alhambra Valley and to contribute to off-site mitigation measures developed by the Specific Plan to the extent required in the conditions of approval . g . Traffic: This project shall result in an insigni- ficant increase in traffic along Alhambra Valley Road and otherwise . The conditions of approval require the construction of specific improvements along Alhambra Valley Road . Further , the applicant will participate in other improvements along Alhambra Valley Road , as may be required by the Specific Plan , to the extent required under conditions of approval . The Board of Supervisors concurs with the residents in the Alhambra Valley who want to retain the present general width of Alhambra Valley Road consistent with the rural residential character of the area . 4 . Given the foregoing, THE BOARD FINDS that an environ- mental impact report is not required for this project and that the project as revised with the conditions of approval as revised miti- gates all significant impacts . B. Subdivision Findings . 1 . The proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for its design and improvement , is consistent with the applicable adopted general plan, in particular the 1982 General Plan Amendment for the greater Alhambra area , and is compatible with the objec- tives , policies , general land uses and programs specified in it , and as follows: a. The site development plans , house plans and eleva- tions , accessory structures , fences and keeping of horses are subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator to insure func- tional and visual compatibility with the physical character and visual images of the Alhambra Valley, consistent with the General Plan . -3- b . It will not adversely affect or strain existing community facilities , including roads and drainage facilities , in that the proposed project will be making or paying for the appropriate improvements as set forth in the conditions of approval and as may be required under the Specific Plan consistent with those conditions . Mitigation measures outlined above have been agreed to and provided in the project in the conditions of approval with respect to the goals and policies of the Open Space Conservation , Scenic Routes , Seismic , Safety, and Safety and Fire Protection and other Elements of the General Plan . c . The project is consistent with the intent of the General Plan and in particular the 1982 General Plan Amendment for the greater Alhambra area, which called for large lot residential development on properties near Alhambra Valley Road as a means to preserve the rural residential quality of life in the Alhambra Valley . By funding and participating in a Specific Plan study, this project assists in further implementation of that General Plan Amendment . 2. The design of the project provides , to the extent feasible , for future passive or natural heating and cooling oppor- tunities as specified in the conditions of approval which require siting of the homes to provide for energy conservation. ' 3. There is no substantial evidence to deny the proposed land use , as the Board is unable to and does not make any of the following findings: a . The proposed map is not consistent with the appli- cable general and specific plans (in fact , as set forth above , the proposed tentative map is consistent with the applicable General Plan and the applicant will fund and participate in a Specific Plan study and implementation) . b . The design or improvement of the proposed sub- division is not consistent with the applicable General and Specific Plans (in fact , as set forth above , the design or improvement is consistent with the applicable General Plan and protects the rural residential character of the Alhambra Valley) . c . This site is not physically suitable for the type of development (to the contrary, the site plan demonstrates its physical suitability when developed consistent with the conditions of approval ) . d . This site is -not physically suitable for the proposed density of development (to the contrary, the site plan demonstrates the physical suitability of - the site for the proposed density) . e . The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvement is likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantial unavoidable injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat (to the contrary, the Negative Declaration with Initial Study found that any significant environmental effect had been mitigated by the project and conditions of approval as revised) . f . The design of the subdivision or type of improve- ments is likely to cause serious public health problems (there is no evidence to support such a concern given that a public water supply is required , leach fields used must meet standards of the Department of Health, and significant drainage improvements must be installed , among other things , pursuant to conditions of approval ) . g . The design of the subdivision or the type of improvements will conflict with easements , required by the public at large , for access through , or use of , property within the proposed subdivision (there are no such public access easements) . -4- NOW, THEREFORE , the Board hereby DENIES the appeal of the Alhambra Valley Improvement Association and APPROVES the tentative map for Subdivision 6487, with conditions ' of approval which are set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference; and The Board further DIRECTS the Director of Planning to file a Notice of Determination with the County Clerk , in accordance with the provisions of 14 C .A.C . 15075. I hereby certify that thla Is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTEQ: - _1. " 2,6 ; / !?�?S ,.. PHIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Boatel of Supervisors and County Administrator sy Deputy cc: Director of Planning Public Works Director County Counsel Alhambra Valley Improvement Assn . Ferguson & Wollman California Equity Fund Contra Costa County Fire Protection District -5- EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION 6487: 1. This approval is based on the revised tentative map received by the Planning Department on October 1, 1984, for 47 lots with the following conditions. Location of home sites, driveways, and septic tank leach fields as shown on the tentative map are conceptual and may be relocated subject to review of the Zoning Administrator and the Health Department. An additional lot is approved for dedication to the Contra Costa Consolidated Fire District for a fire station site near the entrance to the project in the vicinity of Lot 45. Submit a revised tentative map for 48 lots which revises the lot lines to provide a minimum area of 40,000 sq. ft. for the three lots involved. A portion of Lot 43 may be included in the relotting pattern. If variances are necessary they are granted with this approval. The revised tentative map shall be submitted for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. 2. Development rights for other than one single family residence and appurtenant structures shall be deeded to the County to prevent further subdivision. 3. Development of each lot shall be designed to minimize grading, and homes and accessory structures designed to have a low profile and/or be screened by vegetation. Crib walls shall be utilized for driveways and site development on steep sites to minimize height of cut and fill slopes. Fences shall be of unobtrusive design. All concentrated storm runoff, subsurface water and swimming pool drainage shall be conveyed to an erosion resistant drainage.facility. A minimum of four (4) on-site parking spaces shall be provided on each lot. The existing natural drainage patterns on the individual parcels shall be maintained. Drainage which has been collected cannot be discharged onto the adjacent property as a concentrated flow. Direct runoff away from geologically unstable or potentially unstable areas of the site. Site development plans, house plans and elevations, accessory structures, fences and keeping of horses shall be subject to review and approval of the Zoning Adminis- trator. Siting of homes shall be reviewed for energy conservation features. These criteria shall be included in the CC &`R's for the development. CC & R's shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator prior to recording the Final Map. 4. The architectural review board proposed by the developer shall establish written criteria specifying the use of subdued colors and finishing materials for project structures that are compatible with the surrounding landscape. 5. Adequate fencing of an inconspicuous design shall be required to contain domestic animals with gates to be closeable by a nearby rancher when necessary. Submit proposed design and color for review and approval fo the Zoning Administrator. The approved design shall be incoporated in the C.C. & R's for the project. 6. Fire retardant roofing and automatic fire sprinkler systems shall be installed for each residence. Driveways shall have a maximum gradient of 20%, with pavement width and turnouts, if necessary, as approved by the Fire District. Weed abatement and 6487 Page 2 prominent address locations shall be provided as required by the District. Addresses shall be clearly visible from the street 24 hours a day. Irrigated landscape buffers at least 30 feet wide shall be required around each residence. These requirements shall be incorporated in the CC & R's for the development. 7. The applicant has agreed to dedicate a fire station site in accordance with Condition #1 above. If for any reason the station site is deleted, the applicant has indicated he will pay $45,496 as a pro-rata share of the costs for a new fire station and equipment to help reduce emergency response time. 8. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Consolidated Fire District for water supply, fire hydrants, roadway turnouts, maintenance of the district's fire trail system, and weed abatement as modified by Condition 29 C3. A copy of the Fire District's letter of August 31, 1984, is attached. 9. Water supply serving the properties concerned shall be by the City of Martinez. Each individual living unit shall be served by a separate water connection. Such water distribution system located within the boundaries of the properties concerned in this subdivision shall become an integral part of the City of Martinez water distribution system. 10. The water storage reservoir shall be given architectural treatment to reduce its visibility. This could include surface texture and color, berming, landscaping, and the construction of a superstructure all designed to make the reservoir conform with the natural vegetation and terrain of the reservoir site. Plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of Planning prior to recording the Final Map. 11. Prior to recording the Final Map, submit evidence to the Director of Planning which indicates that all of the property has been included in the urban water sphere and that satisfactory arrangements for water service have been made with the City of Martinez. 12. Prior to recording the Final Map each lot shall have received approval of the Health Department for an individual sewage disposal system to serve a four bedroom residence. 13. Grading for roads, driveways, and site development shall be designed to achieve a natural rounded appearance with 2 to 1 cut and fill slopes minimized. Height of cut or fill slopes shall be kept low by use of crib walls where necessary. Stability rating of the consultant's report shall be considered. Leach fields shall not be located upon or adjacent to the most hazardous rated land. 14. Erosion protection shall be a criteria for development of the subdivision improve- ments. Slopes exposed by grading shall be replanted with native grasses and plant materials. An erosion protection plan shall be submitted for development of the subdivision improvements. Plans shall be submitted for review and comments to the Soil Conservation District and to the County staff for approval. 15. Preliminary soil report and engineering geology/soil and foundation reports for development of individual sites shall comply with recommendations 2 through 5 of the r" 6487 Page 3 Darwin Myers report dated 11/12/84. Final Map shall cite Myers' 11/12/84 geologic investigation report. 16. Prior to recording the Final Map submit three copies of a preliminary geologic and design-level soil report for subdivision improvements to the Planning Department. The report recommendations shall be implemented by grading and improvement plans. 17. Prior to issuance of building or grading permits for each lot proposed improvements shall be reviewed by a soils engineer and engineering geologist and a report submitted with recommendations for grading, drainage, foundations and retaining walls. Infor- mation from the geologic and soils reports above shall become the basis for site development engineering geologic and soils reports. An erosion protection plan shall be submitted with each building permit application. The plan shall have been submitted for review and comment to the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and for approval to the County staff. 18. Revegetate exposed soil surfaces after grading using native, drought resistant vegetation by hydromulching or other suitable technique. Do not allow slopes to stand unvegetated during the winter rainy season. 19. Construct the on-site storm drain system to Contra Costa County standards, in accordance with recommendations of the soils and geologic consultant including provision of permanent erosion control features. Control potential erosion during construction. Erosion contol plans shall be submitted for review and comment to the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and for approval to the County staff. 20. Prior to recording the Final Map the crossings and drainage facilities affecting project creeks shall be subject to review and approval of the Department of Fish and Game and the Flood Control District. Design shall be in accordance with recommen- dations of a detailed soil and foundation report. 21. Any discharge to the creek shall provide adequate outfall protection. The design of the improvements shall specifically address any existing erosion problems or slope stability problems. Plans shall be subject to review and comment by the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District and for approval by the County staff. 22. Any work affecting the creeks shall be submitted to the Department of Fish and Game for their review and approval. 23. If any cultural materials are encountered during grading, work within 30 yards of the encounter shall be halted and a qualified archaeologist and/or representative from the American Indian Council, San Pablo, shall be contacted to evaluate the finds and recommend further mitigation. 24. The developer shall diligently pursue and work with the developer of Subdivision 6443 to the east to establish a road connecting the projects. The alignment may be by extension of the unnamed road located between lots 36 and 37 through the Almond property just to the north of the project boundary. 6487 Page 4 25. A 10 foot wide equestrian trail shall be established along one side of the project streets for use of the project homeowners. The trail shall be placed in a non exclusive easement and be maintained by the Homeowner's Association. 26. A wildlife/riparian corridor shall be established over the project creeks extending 50 feet from the top of bank on both sides of the creek. Open fences, such as welded wire, shall be installed by the developer on the easement line to denote the extent of the corridor. The existing roadways along the creek may be established as equestrian trails for use of project homeowners. Maintenance shall be provided by the Homeowner's Association. Development rights to the easement shall be granted to the County. An easement within or encompassing the corridor of the creek through the central portion of the site shall be offered to the East Bay Regional Park District, with connecting links to Alhambra Valley Road and the north property boundary, for use as a regional trail. Precise location and details shall be worked out prior to recording the Final Map. Maintenance shall be provided by the Park District. 27. A plan for maximum preservation of the trees and existing vegetation on the property shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator prior to recording the Final Map. The plan shall indicate areas and trees to be preserved and shall be incorporated in the project CC & Rs. 28. The developer has a private agreement with the City of Martinez to sign an annexation petition prior to recording the Final Map and to pay park fees and traffic mitigation fees to the City in addition to the fees collected by the County. Prior to recording the Final Map the developer shall submit a mechanism for implementation of the collection of these fees which is acceptable to the County and the City of Martinez. 29. Comply with the requirements of the Public Works Department. A. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the County Ordinance Code, this subdivision shall conform to the provisions of the County Subdivision Ordinance (Title 9) . Any exceptions therefrom must be specifically listed in this conditional approval statement. B. The following exception to Title 9 is permitted for this subdivision: 1. Section 96-14.002, " Improvement of County Streets," provided the developer will contribute $25,000 to a Road Improvement Fee Trust (Fund No. 819200-0800) designated toward Alhambra Valley Road improvements. The cost of pavement widening to improve ingress and egress movements at the access road, will be credited as part of this contribution. C. The interior road system shall comply with the following: 1. All roads, except Oak Tree Lane and Stoneyford Lane, shall be 20-foot paved roadways within 40-foot private access easements. Oak Tree Lane and Stoneyford Lane shall be 20-foot paved roadways within 25-foot private access easements. 6487 Page 5 2. All roads shall conform to County public road standards for minor streets with the exception of the pavement width requirements. 3. Provide paved turnouts acceptable to the fire district for the purpose of expediting emergency accesses. 4. Install signing to prohibit parking on all roads (excluding driveways) . D. Establish a mechanism for the perpetual maintenance of the interior private road system subject to the approval of the Public Works Depart- ment. - E. Convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, additional right of way on Alhambra Valley Road as required for the planned future width of 84 feet. F. Construct off-site drainage improvements approved by the Public Works Department, OR, at the developer's option, Contribute to the County Drainage Deficiency Fee Trust (Fund No. 812100- 0800) designated for Zone 5 the equivalent of $0.25 per square foot of added impervious surface area. An average of 10,690 square feet of impervious surface area per parcel , including road surfaces, will be used for this purpose. G. Mitigate traffic impacts of this development by constructing safety related improvements on Alhambra Valley Road consisting of trimming vegetation along the north side of Alhambra Valley Boulevard to improve sight distance, constructing gravel shoulder improvements and installing signage as approved by the Public Works Department. These improvements shall extend from the west end of the site to the entrance of proposed Subdivision 6443. In addition, the developer shall provide 20-foot turning radii to facilitate turning to and from the access road at its junction with Alhambra Valley Road. H. The developer shall work with the developer of Subdivision 6443 to the east in planning for a road connecting the projects and shall submit plans, satisfactory to the- Public Works Department, that demonstrates the feasibility of such a road. I. Construct a regional detention basin facility to the specifications of the Flood Control District. The actual construction of the basin will be at the option of the District. The developer shall be given credit against the drainage fee for the construction if performed, and that the one or two lots lost by the possible basin may be relocated in the subdivision by allowing some lots below 5 acres, i .e. , the total number of lots in the development would be maintained. • 1 6487 Page 6 J. Where the creek has sufficient capacity, the creek crossings shall be constructed with drop structures. The drop structures should be in a dedicated drainage easement. Full credit against the drainage fee shall be allowed for the drop structures. K. Convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, a drainage easement of sufficient size to encompass the drop structures and access required for their maintenance. L. Improvement plans for storm drainage and traffic related items shall be subject to review by the City of Martinez. M. Contribute $1,000 per lot to the County within 90 days of the Board of Supervisor's action on the appeal to provide partial financing of a Specific Plan for Alhambra Valley. N. Contribute $17,000 per lot as the developments fair share of the area's infrastructure needs. Full credit towards this contribution will be allowed for the following: 1. Fire Facilities Contributions 2. Park Dedication Fee (City and County) 3. Road Improvements/Contributions, including traffic fees (City and County) 4. Drainage Mitigation Contribution/Improvements 5. Specific Plan Contribution 6. Domestic Water Supply (pump stations, reservoirs, and mains to reservoirs). Whether any other domestic water supply construction costs will be considered as part of the Specific Plan area's infrastructure costs will be determined as part of the Specific Plan review and determination process. If the developer's costs of construction of Specific Plan infrastructure improvements are less than $17,000.00 per lot, then the balance shall be paid into an interest bearing trust account for Specific Plan infrastructure improvements to be established by the County. Payment must be made when so directed by the Public Works Department. If the final determination for infrastructure costs per lot under the Specific Plan is less than $17,000.00, then the developer shall receive a credit for cash contributions to the trust fund, which reflect the difference between $17,000.00 and the final determination of infrastructure costs per lot, with accrued interest. If the developer's construction costs for infrastructure improvements exceed $17,000.00 per lot, and there is no cash contribution to the- infrastructure trust fund, then no reimbursement will be provided to the developer. DP:ed/plp9asub CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CONSOLIDATED FIRE.DISTRICT 2010 GEARY ROAD �)kt. BISVPLEASANT HILL, CA 94523-4694 TELEPHONE (415) 939-3400 BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION I August 31, 1984 rn r-o Contra Costa County -� -4 Planning Department z D P. . O. Box 951 s,o Martinez, CA 94553 © �+ Zr 'v D W pC Attn: Dolores Peterson �z SUBJECT: Subdivision 6487 (Stonehurst) t -4 Alhambra. Valley Road Dear Ms. Peterson: We have reviewed tentative map #6487 to establish a major subdivision. The develop- ment is to consist of 47 residential lots. . This project is regulated by codes and ordinances administered by this Fire District relative. to Contra Costa County Ordi- nance 83/44. If approved by your office, the following shall be included as condi- tions of approval: _ 1. The developer shall provide an adequate and reliable water supply for fire : protection as follows:. a. Non-sprinklered - ordinary roof coverings = 1750 GPM b. Pion-sprinklered - fire-retardant roof coverings = 1250 GPM C. Sprinklered - ordinary roof coverings = 1125 GPM d. Sprinklered - `fire-retardant roof coverings' = 625 GPM 2. According to available information, existing water supply facilities in the area probably -are not adequate to provide the fire flow required for the subject project. You are advised to contact the appropriate water supply agency to determine whether such- fire flows will be available. If such fire flows will not be available, additional built-in fire protection shall be provided. 3. The developer shall provide 20 hydrants of the East Bay type. Location of hydrants will be determined by this office upon submittal of 3 copies of a , tentative map or site plan. Cost of the installation to be borne by the developer. 4. Provide access roadways .with all-weather driving surfaces of not less than 20 feet of unobstr.uct:,d width, and not less than 13'6" of vertical clearance, to within 150 feet. of all portions of the exterior walls of every building. Access roads shall not exceed 20% grade, shall have a minimum inside. turning rii:]ius of 23 .feet, bridges must be capable of supporting the imposed loads of fire apparatus (.1:6 tons) C.C.C. Planning Dept./D. Peterson RE: Subdivision 6487 (Stonehurst) August 31, 1984 Page 2 x It is also recommended. that turn-outs be provided every'' 500 feet where practical to mitigate problems associated with dead-end roads without secondary access routes. 5. Dead-end fire department access roads in excess of 150 feet long shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire department apparatus. 6. Where. open space is to be .maintained for public or private use, access. into these areas from public ways shall be provided. These access ways shall be a minimum 16 foot. width to accommodate .fire department equipment. The continued access and maintenance of the District's fire trail system shall also be insured. All open spaces, when left in their natural state, shall meet the Fire District's .weed abatement standards. Where practical, we would encourage the use of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Land Management Program utilizing livestock grazing. This would require fencing the properties and allowing animals to graze to approximately a 25% residual. If this method is not utilized, mechanical abatement shall, be required. Contact Senior Inspector Emery of this office for minimum weed abatement requirements. It is .requested:.that a copy:;of the conditions of. approval for the subject project be forwarded to this office when compiled by the planning agency. If you have any questions regarding .this matter, please contact the. undersigned. " Sincerely, William'. Maxfie Fire Chief Z1_11 by: arleernand Fire Inspector WFM/CH:Vw cc:+ Ferguson & Wollman, Consulting Engineers File THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on March 26, 1985 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson ' and Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers ABSTAIN:None SUBJECT: Specific Plan, �Alhambra Valley Area The Board on this date heard testimony during the hearing on Subdivision 6487 (Stonehurst) , including that of a number of persons who supported the preparation of a specific plan for the Alhambra Valley area. As recommended by Supervisor Fanden, IT IS BY .THE BOARD ORDERED that staff is requested to develop a time schedule for a specific plan for- the Alhambra Valley. 1 hereby eertify that this Is a true andeorrcateopyal an aetlon taken and entered on the minutes of go Roar of Supervisors an wan the date shown. ATTESTED: _. . �')' .2 6 , lyf S PHIL BATCHELOR,Clerk cf the Boar of Supervkcre and County Administrator By Oeputy D Orig. Dept.: cc: Director of Planning Alhambra Valley Improvement Association