HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05201986 - T.8 � y'r
THE BOARD 0 SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA T.8
Adopted this Order on , May 20, 1986 , by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Fanden
ABSTAIN: Supervisor Powers
--------------- ----------------------------------------------------
--------------- ----------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Rezon ng Application 2639-RZ, Development Plan 3046-85 and
appea of Sandmound Investors from Conditions of Approval
on Su 6610, Bethel Island area.
The B and on April 29 , 1986 fixed this date for futher
public hearing on the rezoning application 2639-RZ, Development Plan
3046-85 and appeal of Sandmound Investors from conditions of appro-
val on Subdivision 6610 , Bethel Island area.
Harvey Bragdon, Acting Director of Community Development,
explained the applications and the circumstances of the appeal.
Supervisor Torlakson expressed concern that the calculated
capacity for Sandmound Boulevard does not reflect actual capacity.
He also expressed concern that Sandmound Boulevard is not a standard
Level C road. Ile listed problems with the road that need attention.
He stated that scores of people had called opposing the project. He
felt denial of the project would not solve the problems of traffic
and transportation with the road. He proposed staff look at the
possibility of fee benefit area, drainage improvements and the
extension of Cypress Road, which is not formally in the General
Plan. He felt that fire response is also a problem.
The following people appeared to speak to the project:
Constance Brady, 2690 Taylor, Bethel Island, Architect for
the project, gave a brief history of the steps in this project and
emphasized the need for no further delay. She explained that the
project had been redesigned and her client has done everything asked
of him. The client does not mind contributing his fair share but
wishes no further delay.
Arthur Shelton, 650 California Street, San Francisco,
representing Sandmound Investors, spoke on the inflation of the fees
and that his client was willing to agree to the condition of fees
currently being planned for the rest of the projects in the County,
and he stressed that the project can' t stand indecision or further
delay.
Darr? 1 Edwards, Rt. 2, Box 293D, Oakley, expressed con-
cern for theli estyle of those already living in the area and for
the condition o Sandmound Boulevard during construction. He com-
mented that the e should be another way to get to the project.
Charles Hunter, Rt. 2, Box 318, Oakley, spoke on the need
for contstructi n of a road to the project.
Rhonda Hansen, Rt. 2, Box 335 Oakley, was not against the
project per se ut she is concerned about the safety of families and
pets. She also expressed concern for the country environment. She
would like to see Cypress or Delta used to keep traffic off
Sandmound Boulevard.
Ray D schamp, 4776 Sandmound Blvd. , Oakley, spoke on the
condition of Sandmound Boulevard.
Constance Brady spoke in rebuttal. She felt that since
construction would not be in the winter, it would not be that harmful
to the road. She also commented that construction would not occur
all at once.
Super isor Torlakson felt that a total remedy was needed.
He wished a del y to ask for staff to look into the concept of a fee
benefit area or some mechanism to involve all developing properties
in addressing tie needs of the road. He wished to have staff look
into the Cypres3 Road extension, a path for pedestrians and bringing
the road up to evel C, including a condition that this project par-
ticipate in the total solution and the project be phased to come on
line as the imp ovements are made, enhancing safety and traffic
conditions. He elt that this is a question of the quality of life.
He requested th Public Works Department and Community Development
Department to rport back on the feasibility of a fee benefit area
to address the 700,000 extension of Cypress, the $100,000 path and
the upgrading o the Sandmound Boulevard Road to Level C including
drainage issues; also, to report on the concept of phasing the pro-
ject to mitigat contruction and traffic impacts, to time the
phasing in a growth management concept as to the implementation of
conditions mentioned previously and also, to report on the condition of
dealing with tha damage or road impacts due to construction, so it
would be the obligation of the contractor to mitigate.
Supervisor Powers expressed concern over the delay on this
project and whether this area was ready for development.
Supervisor Schroder felt that delay was the deadliest form
of denial and felt the project should be approved subject to
conditions.
The C airman closed the Public Hearing.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the decision on Rezoning
Application 263 -RZ, Development Plan 3046-85 and appeal of
Sandmound Investors from Conditions of Approval on Sub 6610 is
DEFERRED to June 3, 1986 on the determination calendar, and Staff is
REQUESTED to report on Mr. Torlakson' s requested conditional language.
I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED: _1MC c A 0o I (q
PHIL BATCH 1. i, Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
0
By o , Deputy
Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board
cc: Director of Community Development
County Counsel
County Administrator
Sandmound Investors