Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06251991 - H.3 TO: �O:ARD OF 5 ' ERV SORS H. 3 FROM: HARVEY E. . BRAGDON DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: May 14, 1991 SUBJECT: ROBERT T. RAYMOND (Applicant i Owner) , County File ,{EMS 104-89: This is an appeal by the Alamo Improvement Association of the Zoning Administrator's decision to subdivide 2.93 acres into 2 parcels. variances are requested for lot size. Subject property fronts approximately 880 feet on the northeast side of Las Trampas Road, approximately 900 feet easterly of La Colina Road, in the Las Trampas/Alamo area. (A-2) (General Plan: Country Estates) (ZA: R-14) (CT: 3440.00) (Parcel ,#198-220-007) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(8) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS OPTION I 1. Find the Environmental Documentation prepared for this project as adequate and complete. 2. Uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision; deny the appeal from Alamo Improvement Association, require compliance with Title 914-14 "Right-of-way and setbacks" as recommended by Public Works. 3. Direct staff to post a Notice of Determination. OPTION II 1. Find the Environmental Documentation prepared for this project as adequate. 2. Uphold the Zoning Administrator's decision; deny the appeal from the Alamo Improvement Association; grant exception from Title 914-14 "Right-of-way and setbacks" to allow a structure setback of 20 feet from centerline of creek. 3. Direct staff to post a Notice of Determination. BACKGROUND This item was heard before and approved by the Zoning Administrator on August 6, 1990 for two lots. Subsequently, the Zoning Administrator's decision was appealed by the Alamo Improvement Association on the basis that a two parcel map was not available at the Zoning Administrator hearing. On November 7, 1990 this item was scheduled before the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission where the Commission directed Public Works to work with the applicant's engineer to resolve the creek setback concerns of the Alamo Improvement Association. Due to the numerous delays this item was continued to it's final date on May 2, 1991 at which time the Commission had a split vote and was unable to come to majority vote. At which time, upon a new motion the item was referred to the Board of Supervisor's by a unanimous vote of the Commission. YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF C077NTY ADMINISTRATOR REC ATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON June 25 , 1991 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED x _ OTHER Y _ This is the time heretofore noticed by the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors for hearing on a referral from the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission of the appeal by the Alamo Improvement Association from the decision of the Zoning Administrator on the application by Robert T. Raymond (applicant and owner) (MS 104-89) to subdivide 2. 93 acres into two parcels in the Las Trampas/Alamo area. 1 . Mary Fleming, Community Development Department, presented the staff report on the matter before the Board for consideration today, describing the proposed site location, commenting on the history of the proposal and the staff recommendation that the Board uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator to approve the minor subdivision for two parcels but that the Board modify the decision regarding the setback and approve the required setback and deny the appeal of the Alamo Improvement Association. The public hearing was opened and the following persons appeared to speak: Robert Raymond, 1707 Las Trampas Road, Alamo, spoke in favor of Option II , denying the appeal and granting an exception. Gregg Jones, 292 Smith Road, Danville, representing the Alamo Improvement Association, requested denial of the project. Richard Moulds, 32 Pulido Court, Danville, spoke in favor of the applicant. Mr. Raymond spoke in rebuttal. The public hearing was closed. Supervisor Schroder indicated that the record show that the Alamo Improvement Association did not give an endorsement to this project at any time, and he commented on the difficulty of developing this parcel. Supervisor Schroder moved approval of Option II of the staff recommendations. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that Option II, recommendations 1, 2, and 3 are APPROVED; and Minor Subdivision 104-89 is APPROVED with conditions as amended (Exhibit A attached) . VOTE or SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN AYES: NOES: ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Origo CommunityDevelopment Department ATTESTED CC: " County ounsel PHIL BATCHELOR#CLERK OF Public Works-Steve Wright THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Robert Raymond r A COUNT INISTRATOR Building Inspection LT J , DEPUTY San Ramon Valley Fire Protection Dist . By D DD/df CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION 104-89 1. This application for 2 parcels is approved subject to the map submitted to the Community Development Department dated received on April 16, 1991 and must comply with the structure setback requirements using the criteria outlined in Chapter 914-14, "Rights, Ways and Setbacks" of the Subdivision Ordinance, and subject to the following conditions. 2. Where a lot/parcel is located within 300 feet of a high voltage electric transmission line, the applicant shall record the following notice: "The subject property is located near a high voltage electric trans- mission line. Purchasers should be aware that there is ongoing research on possible potential adverse health effects caused by the exposure to a magnetic field generated "by high voltage lines. Although much more research is needed before the question of whether magnetic fields actually cause adverse health effects can be resolved, the basis for such an hypothesis is established. At this time no risk assessment has been made." When a Final Subdivision Public Report issued by the California Department of Real Estate is required, the applicant shall also request that the Department of Real Estate insert the above note in the report. 3. The applicant shall show proof that water and sewage service is available prior to recording the Parcel Map. 4. Development plans and tree preservation plans for each building site shall be reviewed and approval by the Zoning Administrator at least 30 days prior to issuance of building permits. Homes and other large structures shall be designed and placed to minimize the visual impact from adjoining properties or roadways. All structures shall have non-flammable roofs and fire retardant or non-flammable siding. All out-buildings shall have adequate spacing from residences. 5. A scenic easement along the existing hillside beginning at the southwest corner running for 225, feet at the 400-foot elevation upwards; continuing the next 300 feet at the 425-foot elevation upwards; the remainder of the parcel at the 430-foot elevation upwards shall be recorded on the parcel and dedicated to the County. 6. At least 45 days prior to recordation of the Parcel Map or issuance of a grading permit, submit a preliminary geology, soils, and foundation. report by a qualified geologist and soil engineer meeting the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance, Section 94-4.420 for review and approval of the Planning Geologist. Building plans shall carry out the recommendations of the report. 7. Record a statement acknowledging the preliminary geology and soil report by author (firm) and date, with its recommendations, concurrently with the Parcel Map. The statement shall run with deeds to parcels of this subdivision. C�C�job, 1 2. 8. Should archaeological materials be uncovered during grading, trenching or other on-site excavation(s) , earthwork within 30 yards of these materials shall be stopped 'until a professional archaeologist who is certified by the Society for California Archaeology (SCA) and/or the Society of Professional Archaeology (SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation(s), if deemed necessary. 9. Prior to issuance of building permits for swimming pool, tennis courts, sport courts, etc. site plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator. 10. Approval of Minor Subdivision 104-89 is subject to the approval of a rezoning from A-2 to R-65. 11. 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 include the following: 1) Undergrounding of all utility distribution facilities. 2) Conveying all storm waters entering or originating within the subject property, without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage facility, to a natural watercourse having definable bed and banks or to an existing adequate storm drainage facility which conveys the storm waters to a natural watercourse. 3) Designing and constructing storm drainage facilities required by the ordinance in compliance with specifications outlined in Division 914 of the Ordinance and in compliance with design standards of the Public Works Department. 4) Submitting a Parcel Map prepared by a registered civil engineer or licensed land surveyor. 5) Submitting improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer, payment of review and inspection fees, and security for all improvements required by the Ordinance Code or the conditions of approval for this subdivision. These plans shall include any necessary traffic signage and striping plans for review by the County Traffic Engineer. 3. 6) Relinquishing "development rights" over that portion of the site that is within the structure setback area of the natural watercourse. An exception is granted to Section 914-14 "Right of Way and Setbacks" of the Subdivision Ordinance. The structure setback line shall be located 20 feet from the centerline of the creek. Creek cross sections shall be submitted to the Public Works Department., -Engineering Services Division, to verify the location of the. 1 structure setback line. The developer shall execute a recordable agreement in a form satisfactory to the Public Works Department, that will holo.. harmless Contra Costa County and the Flood Control District in the event of damage to the on-site improvements as a result of creek bank failure. B. Furnish proof to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, that legal access to the property is available from the County maintained section of Las Trampas Road. C. Mitigate the impact of the additional storm water run-off from this development on San Ramon Creek by: 1) Removing 1 cubic yard of channel excavation material from the inadequate portion of San Ramon Creek near Chaney Road for each 50 square feet of new impervious surface area created by the development. All excavated material shall be disposed of off-site by the developer at his cost. The site selection, land rights, and construction staking will be by the Flood Control District. ADVISORY NOTES A. The applicant/owner should be aware of the renewing requirements prior to recording the Parcel Map or requesting building or grading permits. B. Applicant shall comply with the Park Dedication Fee Ordinance. C. Comply with provisions of the Heritage Tree Ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors. D. Comply with the requirements of the Central Sanitary District (see attached). E. Comply with requirements of the San Ramon Valley Fire Protection District F. Comply with the requirements of the Health services Department, Environ- mental Health Division. G. Comply with the requirements of the Building Inspection Department. Building permits are required prior to the construction of most structures. 4. H. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Game. The applicant should notify the Department of Fish and Game, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599, of .any proposed construction within the development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources, per the Fish and Game Code. I. This project may also be subject to the requirements of the United States Army Corps of Engineers. The applicant should notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to determine if g .permit is required. J. The applicant will be required to comply with the requirements of the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance for the County-wide Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. Currently the fee for the Alamo region of the County is $2,2.01 for each added single family residence. R. The applicant will be required to comply with the drainage fee requirements for .Drainage Area 13 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. L. Upon written request, the applicant may make a cash payment in lieu of . actual excavation and removal of material from San Ramon Creek. The cash payment will be calculated at the rate of $0.10 per square foot of new impervious surface area created by the development. The added impervious surface area created by the development will be based on the Flood Control District's standard impervious surface area ordinance. The Flood Control District will use these funds to work on San Ramon Creek annually. M. The applicant will be required to pay an environmental review fee for the Department of Fish and Game at the end of the appeal period {$1,275}. Failure to do so will result in fines. In addition, the approval is not final or .vested until the fee is paid. A check for this fee shall be submitted to Contra Costa County for submittal with the final environmental documents. DD/aa MS XV/104-89C.DD 7/11/90 8/21/90 ' 4/36/91 4/23/91 6/26/91 u' 1�0 � Central Contra Costa Sanitary District 1 5019 Imhoff Place Marline4 California 945534392 (415) •: •0 FAX. (415)67&7211 ROGER J.DOLAN General Manager Chief Engineer JAMES L HAZARD Counselforthe District (415)933.1430 JOYCE E.McMILLAN Secretary of the District December 8, 1989 Contra Costa County Community Development Department Canmunity Administration Bldg., North Wing 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553-0095 ATTENTION: MR. ROBERT DRAKE ., 0-3 Gentlemen: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW MS 104-89 APN: 198-220-007 WS: 33 THOMAS BROS. LOC. : 77D5 The above referenced project has been reviewed by this office. 1. SEWER SERVICE AVAILABILITY AND GENERAL DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS 1.1 The project site is within the CCCSD boundaries, and sewer service has been planned for this area. 1.2 The District's sewer system__ is adjacent to the proposed project. 2. SOURCE CONTROL REQUIREMENTS The District has reviewed this project for source control requirements. Base wastewater flow from this project appears to be domestic wastewater such as from residential , school, office, or church sources. Specific source control requirements are normally not applicable to domestic wastewater. However, materials such as gasoline, oil ,. sand, paint, pesticide rest dues, or other toxic substances are prohibited from being introduced into the District's sewer system. Contry Costa County Page 2 December 8, 1989 3. SEWER .CAPACITY The District has completed a limited analysis for the sewer system downstream of the proposed project. This analysis consisted of a review of District records for capacity deficiencies and a determination that the proposed project will generate less wastewater than our "trigger" for further analysis. The existing main sewer is adequate for the_-additional wastewater which - will be generated by this project, but District facilities . farther downstream do not have adequate flow carrying rapacity under the District's current design criteria for ultimate conditions. Improvements to District's existing facilities that are required as a result of new development will be funded from applicable District fees and charges. The developer will be required to pay these fees and charges at the time of connection to the sewer system. The Board of Directors adopted a new system of Facilities Capacity Fees on May 4, 1989. The Facilities Capacity Fees will be phased in over a two-year period that starts on July 1, 1989. Please telephone me at (415) 689-3890, Ext. 364, if you need additional information on the Facilities Capacity Fees. 4. PRIVATE SEWERS The proposed project includes side sewers. A side sewer is defined as a private sewer which is owned and maintained by the property owner and which connects the plumbing system of the building to the main sewer. The side sewer begins at the point of connection to the building plumbing system two feet outside the foundation line or building wall and terminates at the point of connection to the main sewer. District policy requires that the developer be responsible for installation of the side sewer and the property owner be responsible for operation and maintenance of the side sewer. District review of the design and inspection of the work on the side sewer shall in no way constitute our acceptance of any responsibility for maintenance or damage to property due to construction and subsequent operation and maintenance of the side sewer. The design intent of the typical side sewer details, included in the CCCSD "Standard Specification," 1986 Edition, and presented in Sections 32-43 through 32-48, inclusive, is to reduce the amount of rainfall and groundwater' that will infiltrate the sewer, thereby avoiding unnecessary pumping and treatment costs. The typical side sewer details are not intended to meet the geotechnical, structural , or drainage requirements of special situations. EkUL,ULOL U L Contra Costa County Page 3 December 8, 1989 5. HILLSIDE AND CREEK AREA POLICIES The District has a Hillside and Creek Area Sewer Policy which addresses the design and installation of sewers in hillsides or unstable areas. The requirements of this policy must be followed when construction plans are prepared. For your convenience, a copy of the policy is enclosed. The Sanitary District must review and approve any construction plans involving work on the public sewer system prior t(x the developer' s applying for a building permit. The District's Permit Section will receive and process the construction plans. Sincerely, Jack H. Case Associate Engineer JHC:pp Enclosure cc: Robert T. Raymond 1707 Los Trampas Road Alamo, CA 94507 Richard W. Moulds P.O. Box 277 Danville, CA 94526 CENTRAL CONTRA COSTA SANITARY DISTRICT PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED FOR DESIGNING SEWERS TO BE LOCATED IN HILLSIDE AND CREEK AREAS 2. Soils reports will be required where: a. Slopes of hills . where sewers are proposed for installation exceed 15 percent. b. Sewers are 7proposed for installation within fifty feet of creekbeds. c. Sewers are proposed for installation. within the range of influence of a possible landslide from adjacent hill . d. Sewers are proposed for installation in historical slide locations. 2. A soils report prepared by a registered Civil Engineer practicing in Geotechnical Engineering must be submitted by the job engineer which covers the proposed project. 3. If the project geotechnical report provided does not cover an off-road sewer alignment, the District may require a supplementary report. This report, at a minimum, must address the following: a. Supplementary geological setting, general soils and bedrock conditions along the proposed sewer alignment, and recommended set backs from slides and creeks. b. Stability or instability of selected sewer alignment. C* Potential ground water problems. d. Effect of trenching on slope stability (negative impacts on slope). e. Special backfill, special trenching requirements, or special supports that may be recommended. f. Erosion potential of soils around sewer near water courses. g. Recommended corrections if an instability exists or may develop. 4. Installation of sewers in unrepaired slide areas is to be avoided. a. If an acceptable gravity route is feasible around the unrepaired slide, the sewer must be installed around the slide. b. If the only feasible gravity route is through a slide area, a complete study of the slide must be made by a Geotechnical Engineer. The Geotechnical Engineer must propose a solution which is satisfactory to the District. The normal solution is the repair of the slide. C. If a satisfactory gravity solution does not exist, the pumping of sewage from individual homes will be considered. 5. The Protect Engineer must furnish a map which shows existing creeks or swales which may convey water in the vicinity of any proposed sewer main alignments. 6. Sewers shall not be designed to be located in the bottom of swales or creeks. 7. For sewers which will be parallel to swales or creeks, the sewer must be designed far enough away from the drainageway to eliminate the possibility of future eroding around the sewer. A Geotechnical Engineer shall review the proposed alignment and furnish recommendations regarding long-term erosion potentials. a. If it is unfeasible to locate sewer mains on the downslope side of future homes and maintain a safe distance from drainage ways, consideration will be given to installing the sewers in street areas which may result in the installation of residential sewage pumps on individual homes. 8. For sewers which cross creeks or swales, the crossing shall be as nearly perpendicular to the drainageway as feasible. .a. Bank and bottom protection shall be designed per the recommendation of a Geotechnical Engineer and shall be installed in the drainageway as a part of the overhead or underground crossing. b. The Project Engineer shall pay particular attention to designing adequate support foundations and protection for the foundation. 9. An access easement (minimum width of ten feet) shall be granted by the developer from the nearest public street to the creek crossing structure along the route of the sewer main, if possible, for future -mai ntenance. . 10. The attached design standards shall be used by the Project Engineer when designing sewers in hillside and/or creek areas. /M ��1n rD��itl�I U J LIrU L iLl IU L! DESIGN STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO SEWERS WHICH ARE TO BE LOCATED IN HILLSIDE AND CREEK AREAS 1. Sewers to be installed across hillside slopes (generally parallel to contours),-shall be ductile . iron (no- bedding) if.-the cross slope of the hill .exceeds 25 percent. - 2. ercent.2. Sewers to be installed parallel to def i ned creeECss shal l be I ocated no closer than twenty feet from the top of the bank if the creek bank is defined; if not, no closer than thirty feet from the centerline of the creek. 3. Sewers to be installed parallel to defined creeks from twenty to fifty feet away from the top of the bank shall be ductile iron (no bedding) . 4. Manholes to be installed on either ends of creek crossings shall be located no closer than twenty feet from the top of the creek bank.