HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 03281989 - T.3 T. 3
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on March 28 , 1989 by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Schroder, McPeak and Fanden
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisors Powers and Torlakson
ABSTAIN: None
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBJECT: Hearing on General Plan Amendment 3-87-CO, Rezoning
Application 2795=RZ, Development Plan 3011-88 and
Subdivision 7110 , Smith/Perma Bilt and Barrett
Irvine, Walnut Creek Area.
This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of
Supervisors for hearing on the recommendation of the Contra Costa
County Planning Commission on a request by Smith/Perma Bilt
(applicant) and Barrett Irvine (owner) to amend the County General
Plan for 207 acres of land from Agricultural Preserve to Single Family
Residential Low Density and Open Space ( 3-87-CO) and for an associated
development project which would allow for 219 units; and to consider
the Planning Commission recommendation on applications 2795-RZ,
Development Plan 3011-88, and Subdivision 7110 for the proposed
project, in conjunction with the General Plan Amendment in the Walnut
Creek area.
Karl Wandry, Community Development Department, presented the
staff request that the Board direct the Community Development
Department to incorporate the General Plan Amendment into a combined
amendment in the 1989 calendar year, approve the rezoning application,
the final development plan and the tentative map for the subdivision
and adopt the findings presented by the Planning Commission to the
Board relative to this project.
Jim Cutler, Community Development Department, presented the staff
report on the proposed General Plan Amendment, commenting on the
proposed changes to the density, the recreation element and the
circulation element.
Mary Fleming, Community Development Department, commented on the
proposed project, the Planning Commission approval of the application
with amended conditions, and the revised design that had been
submitted by the applicant.
The public hearing was opened and the following persons appeared
to speak:
Randy Smith, 65 Golden Meadows Lane, Danville, representing the
Harold Smith Company, presented a brief history of the project and the
current status of the project.
Bruce Smith, 7 Country Oaks Lane, Danville, representing the
Harold Smith Company, commented on the revised plan that had been
submitted.
Evelyn Munn, 35 Sanders Court, Walnut Creek, Mayor, City of
Walnut Creek, representing the minority position of the City of Walnut
Creek, spoke in opposition.
Gwen Regalia, 1950 White Cliff Court, Walnut Creek, Council
member, City of Walnut Creek, representing the majority position of
the City of Walnut Creek, spoke in favor of not opposing the Rancho
Paraiso project.
Kay Petersen, 36 Deer Trail, Lafayette, spoke in opposition.
Seth Adams, P.O. Box 25 , Concord, representing Save Mt. Diablo,
spoke in opposition.
Bob Doyle, President of Save Mt. Diablo, expressed reluctant
support for the revised plan.
Rob Ferguson, 2055 Robb Road, Walnut Creek, representing the
Walnut Creek Open Space Foundation, expressed concerns with the
proposed Rancho Paraiso project and read a letter of concerns.
Bob Walker, 545 Clayton Street, San Francisco, representing East
Bay Area Trails Council, spoke in support of the mitigated alternative
in the Environmental Impact Review and expressed concerns on issues
including visual impacts.
Peter Baldacci, 2200 Deer Valley Lane, Walnut Creek, spoke in
support.
John Lee, 1880 Tice Valley Boulevard, Walnut Creek, representing
the Walnut Creek Chamber of Commerce, spoke in support.
George Cardinet, 5307 Pine Hollow, Concord, representing the
Heritage Trail Fund, spoke in support.
A.B. McNabney, 116 Leisure Lane, Walnut Creek, representing the
Mt. Diablo Audubon Society, spoke in opposition.
Bob Pickett, 3237 Wanstead Court, Walnut Creek, spoke in support
of the project.
James Gillivan, 3126 Hackney Lane, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition, but expressed that with reduction of the south slope,
possible deletion of the middle knoll and cutting down the density, it
is the start of something in the hills.
Rick Vossekill, 2700 Ygnacio Valley Road, Walnut Creek, spoke in
support.
The Chair read a card from the following person in opposition:
Rachelle Mazar, 29 Pillon Real, Pleasant Hill.
Mike Davis, 111 Peidras Court, Danville, spoke in support.
The Chair read a card from the following person in support:
Arlis G. Paslay, P.O. Box 2171, Martinez.
The Chair read a card from the following person in opposition:
Mark Evanoff, 116 New Montgomery #640, San Francisco,
representing the Greenbelt Alliance.
JoAnn Hanna, 450 Trails End Drive, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition.
Joseph Goldstein, 433 Center Street, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition.
Edith Valle-Riestra, 140 Cora Court, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition.
Joseph Devito, 3180 Oak Grove Road, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition and requested clarification on Condition of Approval #23 .
Marvin J. Terrell, 1816 Venice Drive, Concord, spoke in support.
Edith W. Feldman, 1 Marella Heights Drive, Martinez, spoke in
opposition.
Kevin Walmsley, P.O. Box 3283 , Walnut Creek, representing the
Walnut Green Homes Association, submitted a letter of concerns.
Allan Drabinsky, 3692 Annandale Court, Walnut Creek, spoke in
support of the revised plan.
Margaret Walker, 3323 Whitehaven Drive, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition.
Patricia Kilbourn, 1524 Siskiyou Drive, Walnut Creek, spoke in
favor.
Esther Gorman, 260 North Gate Road, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition.
Betty Murphy, 248 Ivy Drive, Orinda, representing the League of
Women Voters of Diablo Valley, spoke in opposition.
Ed Dimmick, 1251 Sheppard Court, Walnut Creek, spoke in
opposition.
Supervisor Schroder expressed concerns relative to giving
everyone who wished to do so an opportunity to testify and he
recommended continuing the hearing for one week.
Bruce Smith spoke in rebuttal.
Supervisor McPeak clarified issues she wanted addressed including
dedication of park fees, traffic fee mitigation area, child care,
sidewalks, and the homeless fund issue.
Supervisor Schroder requested clarification on issues including
grading and the trail.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the above matter
is CONTINUED to April 4, 1989 at 1 : 00 P.M. ; and Community Development
Department staff is DIRECTED to respond to concerns raised by
Supervisors today.
I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Su isors o the date shown.
ATTESTED: 0
PHIL BA CHELOR,Clerk of the Board
o uperviso nd CountyAdministrator
0
By ,DeDuty