Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04251989 - T.3 L' T.'.3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Co�ltt'a FR+14: Harvey E. Bragdon, Costa Director of Community Development ^O^ DATE: March 10, 1989 (J SUBJECT: APPEAL - DK Associates (Applicant) - M.B. Line, Inc.. (Owner) of Minor Subdivision 37-88, in the Martinez area. (S.D.II) . Parcel #365-170-017 through 020. SPECIFIC REQUEST S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS(S) 6 BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Deny the appeal of DK Associates/M.B.Lines, Inc. , as recommended by the County Planning Commission on January 17, 1989. 2. Adopt the Planning Commission's findings as set forth in their Resolution No. 14-1989, as the basis for your Board's decision. 3. Accept the environmental review documentation as being complete and adequate. CONTINUED ON ATTAC11MEr1T: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOPOU NDATI OF DO41D COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON Argil 25 , 1989 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER x _ This being the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on the appeal of DK Associates (appellant) and M.B. Lines (appellant) from the decision of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission as the Board of Appeals denying the request by DK Associates (applicant) and M.B. Lines (owner) to divide 171 plus or minus acres into two parcels (MS 37-88) in the Martinez area. Mary Fleming, Community Development Department, presented the staff report on the appeal before the Board, described the site of the proposed minor subdivision, and commented on the pending applications for rezoning and a development plan for 132 residential units on parcel A of this site. She commented on the Zoning Administrator' s decision that the minor subdivision should be heard concurrently with the rezoning and development plan. She commented on the Planning Commission decision to deny the appeal and the minor subdivision. She presented the staff recommendation that the Board deny the current appeal and uphold the Planning Commission' s decision to deny the minor subdivision and have the applications heard as one package. Supervisor Fanden requested clarification on the strip of land around the outside. Mary Fleming responded that it was originally a buffer zone. Supervisor Schroder requested clarification on the status of the rezoning, development plan and subdivision pending on this property. Mary Fleming responded that an Environmental Impact Review was being done on the other pending applications and there had been no review of those items at this point. The public hearing was opened and the following people appeared to speak: 1. • Dennis Cunningham, 110 Blue Ravine Road, Suite 200, Folsom, owner Oakmont Memorial Park and Mortuary, presented background on the requested minor subdivision by Davidon Homes, and commented that he did not understand why the Oakmont Memorial Park and Mortuary should be involved in the development process when all they wished to do was sell this land. He also commented that this is dedicated cemetery property at this point in time and the dedication will not be raised until they have a parcel map, and that they cannot sell dedicated cemetery property, therefore the sale cannot be consummated until the dedication is raised. He requested that the Board grant the parcel map so that they may sell the property, and so that Davidon Homes may then proceed with development. L. Wayne Policz, 1600 South Main Street #150, Walnut Creek, Vice-President of Davidon Homes, requested that the Board consider today a minor parcel map. He commented on the other applications that Davidon Homes had filed so that the staff could see what they were proposing to do with the land that they were requesting be parceled off. He commented also that the item before the Board today is strictly the parcel map and no commitment from the County as to what is the ultimate fate of the proposed development. He commented on the amount of money that they have invested and their concern with the time frame on the option to purchase the property, and he requested approval of the parcel map today. David Gold, 1855 Olympic, Walnut Creek, McCutcheon, Doyle, Brown and Enerson, representing Davidon Homes, spoke in support of the appeal by DK Associates for the lot split, and addressed the legal question of the timing of the parcel map process and subsequent subdivision map processing. He requested the Board take testimony today only on the lot split. He commented that Oakmont should not be tied to the lengthy development process. He advised that Davidon would acquire no vested rights to proceed with any development by a simple lot split, that there is no limit on the County' s power under state law to attach future conditions, dedications and work on the design of the project when those applications are before the County decision makers, and that the parcel map only permits the sale of the property to Davidon to occur and nothing else. He commented on the dangerous legal position for the County to take by denying the parcel map, that it would be putting a moratorium on the sale of real property. He also commented on concerns relative to the CEQA process on the project. He also advised that the County in their view has not prepared adequate findings to support a denial under the Subdivision Map Act. He requested approval of the parcel map. Robert M. Duchi,-1:911-S-an-Miguel Drive #203, Walnut Creek, representing DK Associates, Civil Engineers, applicants on the parcel map, described how the parcel lines were set and why. Bernard Norton, 1101 Silverhill Court, Lafayette, representing the Silverhill Homeowners' Association, spoke in support of the Zoning Administrator and County Planning Commission decision that this minor subdivision not be approved and requested the Board uphold that denial. He presented a packet illustrating objections. He urged denial of the appeal. Supervisor Torlakson submitted for the record a speaker card from Coralyn Hayden, 3289 Theresa Lane, Lafayette, signed by two other people, in opposition to the appeal. Tina Wilson, 5361 Alhambra Valley Road, Martinez, expressed agreement with most of Mr. Norton' s testimony and questioned the distinction between cemetery property and dedicated cemetery property. She commented on the supplemental environmental impact report prepared by the Community Development Department dated October 21, 1988. Delores Mahan, 3376 Reliz Highland Road, Lafayette, spoke in opposition to the Minor Subdivision 37-88. Liz Belcher, 1148 Silverhill Court, Lafayette, spoke in opposition to the appeal, commenting on a letter dated April 21,1989. David Gold spoke in rebuttal. The public hearing was closed. 2. Supervisor Fanden moved denial of the minor subdivision. Supervisor Powers seconded the motion and inquired as to whether it was a denial without prejudice. Supervisor Fanden agreed that that was her recommendation and commented on recent meetings with Supervisor McPeak, herself and the Reliz Valley Study Committee. Supervisor Powers advised that he would withdraw his second to the motion. The Board discussed the matter. Supervisor Schroder commented that what was before the Board today is simply a Lafayette landowner willing to sell a parcel of property to a Lafayette resident with the full knowledge that if this split was approved so that the purchase could be made that there was absolutely no commitment relative to the development of the property, and that was why he was opposing the recommendation to deny this individual from purchasing a parcel of property. Supervisor Fanden expressed her disagreement with Supervisor Schroder, advising of her past statement that she would not support any further development on Reliz Valley until there was a complete traffic study and report finished. Supervisor Schroder requested clarification from staff as to the amount of increased traffic on the road if this minor subdivision were approved. Karl Wandry responded to Supervisor Schroder' s request. Supervisor McPeak advised that she was not opposed to the minor subdivision before the Board today. Supervisor Schroder moved to grant the appeal, clarifying that the motion is to allow a willing buyer to buy property from a willing seller. Supervisor Torlakson indicated support for the motion but indicated there may be traffic issues involved with the other pending applications that must be addressed before any final approvals. Therefore, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the appeal of DK Associates and M.B. Lines from the decision of the County Planning Commission relative to MS 37-88 is GRANTED; and Minor Subdivision MS 37-88 is APPROVED with conditions (Exhibit A Attached) . VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: I, III, IV, V NOES: II ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. cc: Community Development Dept. , ATTESTEDApril 25, 1989 Attn: Byron Turner PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF DK Associates (Applicant) THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS M.B.Line, Inc. (Owner) COUNTY MINISTRATOR Public Works-Tom Dudziak Assessor BY a County Counsel ' DEPUTY 3 . CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 37-88 1. This approval is based upon the tentative map dated received April 8, 1988, subject to. the conditions listed below. 2. This approval for two parcels does not create or establish the boundaries or area for cemetery use or any future residential development which may be approved substantially different than that indicated by this division and may also require subsequent boundary adjustments. 3. Prior to filing the parcel map for this minor subdivision, an application for a land use permit shall be filed to modify and re,establ i sh the ceme tery use on the reduced area of the property. The application shall be filed per Ordinance Code Section 88-2.402, including plans showing existing and proposed cemetery development, particularly as pit relates to those ar= eas near the common boundary of the two parcels and adjacent properties: The application shall also include information concerning the effect or impact if any, of the change of area to be devoted.' to cemetery use on the endowment care fund. 4. Comply with drainage, road improvement, traffic and utility requirements as follows: 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. Conformance with the Ordinance Code includes the following requirements: 1. Constructing road improvements along the frontage of Reliez Val- ley Road. Because of the nature of this application, an excep- tion to this requirement is permitted. 2. Undergrounding of all utility distribution facilities. Because of the nature of this application, an exception to this require- ment is permitted. 3. Conveying all storm waters entering or originating within the subject property to a natural watercourse having definable bed and banks or to an existing adequate storm drainage facility. As these parcels are large and agricultural in nature, additional run-off resulting from this subdivision will be negligible. An exception to this requirement is permitted providing the appli- cant maintains the existing drainage pattern and does not dispose concentrated storm water run-off onto adjacent property. 4. Submitting a Parcel Map prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor. 5. Applying for encroachment permits from the Public Works Depart- ment, Engineering Services Division, for driveway connections within the right of way of Reliez Valley Road. 2 B. Convey to the County, by Offer of Dedication, additional right of way on Reliez Valley Road as required for the planned future width. C. Comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for Countywide Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Because of the agricultural nature of this application, the fee will be due with the issuance of a building permit on the site rather than at the time of the filing of the Parcel Map. Currently the fee, for this region of the County, is $2,300 for each added single family residence. 5. A lot line adjustment is approved for the area of Parcel C to become part of the adjacent 20 acres to the east (H. Much Iinski-APN#365-160-004) allowing additional access from Hidden Pond Road for pending subdivision 7144. The property transfer shall be accomplished by deed description or by record of survey or both and indicated on the parcel map for MS 8-90-88. The property being transferred shall be combined with the receiving parcel and assessed as one parcel for tax purposes. 6. Prior to filing the parcel map, provision shall be made to the satisfaction of the East Bay Regional Park District, for a riding and hiking trail extending through Parcels A and B to complete a trail connection from Reliez Valley Road west through the site, to East Bay Regional Park lands, subject to final review and approval by the Zoning Administrator. THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS ADVISORY ONLY AND DOES NOT CONSTITUTE" A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. A. Comply with the requirements of the Contra Costa County Consolidated Fire Protection District. BT/GA/df msl7:ms37-88c.bt