The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 05041993 - H.6 H.6 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on May 4, 1993, by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Bishop, McPeak, and Torlakson NOES: None ABSENT: Supervisor Powers and Smith ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Hearing on the Request of Tony Udjur representing the Byron 78 Partnership On April 6, 1993, the Board continued the hearing on the recommendation of the East County Regional Planning Commission on the request of Tony Udjur representing the Byron 78 Partnership requesting a change in the County General Plan for a 78-acre site from Agricultural Lands to Commercial, Office and Light Indistrial Use (County File #5-90-EC), Discovery Bay area. Dennis Barry of the Community Development Department summarized the scope of the proposed project and responded to questions of Board Members. Tony Udjur and partners of the Byron 78 Partnership spoke on the merits of the project and requested the Board to approve it. a: Sanford Skaggs of the Law Firm of McCutchen, Doyle, Brown and Emerson expressed concerns relative to the rezoning and related subdivision that would follow the plan which included but were not limited to traffic and impact of the proposed project on other development in the area. All persons desiring to speak were heard. Board members were in agreement to defer decision on the request of Mr. Udjur pending a report from the Community Development Director on the issues T. raised at the hearing today. THEREFORE, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing is CLOSED and that the decision on Mr. Udjur's request is DEFERRED to May 25, 1993, pending a report from the Communnity Development Director on the issues noted. r 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 a' date shown. ATTESTED: May 4, 1993 Pi-lIL BATCHELOR,Clerk of the Board of k, Supervisors and County Administrator By: U Deputy :i. cc: Community Development Director County Counsel s S' i.. f M1 J; U H. 5 Contra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa w-t, FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDONr County� �"�11,/ DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DATE: March 1, 1993 SUBJECT: BYRON 78 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing and receive testimony on the proposed Byron 78 General Plan Amendment. 2 . Close the public hearing. 3 . Express the Boards intent to Approve the General Plan Amendment as recommended by the East County Regional Planning Commission and direct staff to prepare CEQA findings consistent with this Board action and to schedule these CEQA findings and final general plan approval for when they are completed. They can be scheduled as consent items. FISCAL IMPACT General Plan fees cover the cost of this amendment. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The East County Regional Planning approved this general plan amendment by unanimous vote. The details of the amendment were covered in an EIR and discussed in a staff report. If the Board expresses its intent to approve this amendment, CEQA findings will need to be prepared and adopted consistent with Board direction. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE Cc. Com" _77-tB RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR _ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON May 4 , 199T APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER See Addendum for Board action . VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A x UNANIMOUS (ABSENT I , II 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. Orig: Jim Cutler (646-2035) ATTESTED May 4 , 1993 cc: Community Development Dept. PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Public Works THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CAO ND UNTY iNISTRATOR County Counsel BY , DEPUTY 4/mist/kd:bym78.gpa ADDENDUM TO ITEM H.6 MAY 4, 1993 On April 20, 1993, the Board of Supervisors continued to this date the hearing on the request of Tony Ujdur representing the Byron 78 Partnership requesting a change in the General Plan for a seventy-eight acre site from Agricultural Lands to Commercial, Office and Light Industrial Use (County Pile #5-90-EC) Discovery Bay area. James Cutler, Community Development Department,presented the staff report on the item, describing the proposed site, explaining that the current planning projects are not yet before the Board,just the General Plan Amendment request. The public hearing was opened and the following persons presented testimony: Anthony Ujdur. 116 Birchbark Place, Danville; Clark Morrison, Morrison and Poerster, 11.0. Box 8130 Walnut Creek, representing Byron 78; Malcom Sproule, LSA Associates; Dave Johnson, Johnson/Lyman Architects; A.B. McNabney, 1161 Leisure Lane #7, Walnut Creek, representing Mt. Diablo Audubon Society- S.M. Skaggs, 11.0. Box V. Walnut Creek; Mr. Morrison spoke in rebuttal. The public hearing was closed. Supervisor Torlakson recommended that the Board refer some of the issues discussed today including recreation vehicle storage, access, conditions on the shopping center related to recycling, the wetlands back to staff for a response, and linking this matter to the related current planning applications, and he advised that he would like to have everything back in a package to enable to the Board to look at the total package. Mr. Cutler advised that the County Planning Commission would hear the related applications on June 7, 1993. The Board discussed the matter lurtller. IT IS BY T HE BOARD ORDERED that the hearing on the above matter is CLOSED; and the Conunuility Development Director is REQUESTED to report to the Board of Supervisors on May 251, 1993), on the issues raised at the hearing. :a O M , BYRON 78 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT COUNTY FILE #5-90-EC: A proposal to amend the County General Plan for the 78-acre parcel of land at the northeast corner of State Highway 4 and Bixler ,Road,. in the Discovery Bay area. Agricultural-Residential to twenty-one acres of Commercial, thirteen acres of Office and forty-four acres-of Light Industrial. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA COUNTY APRIL 20, 1993 - 2:00 P.M. . Contra TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa FROM: HARVEY E. BRAGDON DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT x Count / DATE: March 1, 1993 SUBJECT: BYRON 78 GENERAL PLAN AMENDXENT SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATIONS) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Open the public hearing and receive testimony on the proposed Byron 78 General Plan Amendment. 2. Close the public hearing. 3. Express the Boards intent to Approve the General Plan Amendment as recommended by the East County Regional Planning Commission and direct staff to prepare CEQA findings consistent with this Board action and to schedule these CEQA findings and final general plan approval for when they are completed. They can be scheduled as consent items. FISCAL IMPACT General Plan fees cover the cost of this amendment. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The East County Regional Planning approved this general plan amendment by unanimous vote. The details of the amendment were covered in an EIR and discussed in a staff report. If the Board expresses its intent to approve this amendment, CEQA findings will need to be prepared and adopted consistent with Board direction. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE � B, RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR_ RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S) : ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A 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. Orig: Jim cutler (646-2035) ATTESTED cc: Community Development Dept. PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF Public Works THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CAO AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel BY , DEPUTY 4/miund:bym78.gpa Resolution #9 - 1993 RESOLUTION OF THE EAST 'COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RECOM MNDING APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE BYRON 78 PROJECT IN THE DISCOVERY BAY AREA (County File #5-90-EC) WHEREAS, a request was received from Tony Udjur representing the Byron 78 partnership requesting a change in the County General Plan for a seventy-eight acre site. The request is to change the Land Use designation from Agricultural Lands to Commercial, Office and Light Industrial use; and WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors authorizes a General Plan study for this area; and WHEREAS, and Environmental Impact Report was prepared on this application and the document, together with the Responses to Comments document, was circulated to interested agencies and individuals; and WHEREAS, staff prepared a report recommending changes in the General Plan for the area and circulated it to interested agencies, organization and individuals; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on Monday February 1, 1993, and all that wished to testify were heard and the public hearing was closed; and NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the East County Regional Planning Commission finds that the Draft EIR together with the Responses to Comments document to be the Final EIR and to be adequate for the County consideration of this matter; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the East County Regional planning Commission RECOMMENDS APPROVAL of the Byron 78 General Plan Amendment to the Board of Supervisors as recommended by staff except for two minor changes. First, the Commercial and Office areas on the plan map A should extend easterly to the boundary of the site, and second, that the plan text should be modified to delete the words "marsh and"; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all written and graphic material developed for and pertaining to these proceedings are made part of the record; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chair of the East County Regional Planning Commission respectively sign and attest the certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors, all in accordance with the provisions of the State Planning Law. The instruction by the East County Regional Planning Commission to prepare this resolution was given by motion of the Commission on February 1, 1993 by the following vote: AYES: Wetzel, Sobalvarro, Andrieu, Hanson, Maybee, Planchon NOES: None ABSENT: Hem ABSTAIN: None I, Stan Planchon, Vice-Chair of the East County Regional Planning Commission of the County of Contra Costa, State of California, hereby certify that the foregoing was fully called and held in accordance with the law on Monday, February 8, 1993 and this resolution was fully passed and adopted by the following votes: AYES: Wetzel, Hanson, Andrieu, Maybee, Sobalvarro , Planchon NOES; None ABSENT: Hern ABSTAIN: None Vice Chair - East County Regional Planning Commission February 9, 1993 ATTEST: Aeyrag , Director Dev opment Department JC:kd 2/misc/kd 2byron78.res Bellecci & Associates Anthony J. Ujdur Ygnacio Homes 2290 Diamond Blvd. Suite 100 116 Birchbark Place Attn: Anthony Udjur Concord, CA 94520 Danville, CA 94506 2723 Crow Canyon Rd. 1211 San Ramon, CA 94583 Discovery Bay MAC Byron-Bethany-Irrigation Dist-.-- Byron-Union-,School District Bill Slifer Fred Specht George Hoover 4660 Spinnaker Way P.O. Box 273 P.O. Box 118 Byron, CA 94514 Byron, CA 94514 Byron, CA 94514 New Discovery, Inc. Rose Gisler Bernard Monte & Lucia Albers P.O. Box 907 Rose Bernard 1400 Deer Valley Road Concord, CA 94522 P.O. Box 115 Brentwood, CA 94513 Byron, CA 94514 Robert Lamb John Tomlin Joseph & Bessie Riccobuono Eugene & E. Marie Thomas Rt. 1 Box 616 16 Inlet Drive 2421 Teak Ct. Brentwood, CA 94513 Pittsburg, CA 94565 Santa Rosa, CA 95403 William Boyle Norma Mygrant Eugene & Eleanor Marsh Eugene Leyba 1168 Alta Mesa 5000 S. Point Rt. 1 Box 614 Bixler Rd. Moraga, CA 94566 Byron, CA 94514 Brentwood, CA 94513 Charles & Susan Gary Allen & Barbara Dukes Russell & Virginia Harris Rt. 1 Box 114 Timothy & Patricia Sexton Rt. 1 Box 608 Byron, CA 94514 8716 Montiflora Ct. Brentwood, CA 94513 Hollister, CA 95024 Roy & Susan Vinyard Robert Lamb Patterson Byron Seventy-Eight Rt. 1 Box 612 Eugene & E. Marie Thomas c/o Nizar Y. Jharmal Brentwood, CA 94513 2421 Teak Ct. 2590 Grantville St. Santa Rosa, CA 95403 Vancouver BC, Canada V6H3H b:byron78.gpa ' t 4 Contra Costa County - - Planning Department EAST COUNTY REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report and Recommendations Agenda # BYRON 78 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (County File 5-90-EC) I. INTRODUCTION A request was received from Tony Udjur to amend the County General Plan from Agricultural Lands to Commercial (21 acres), office 03 acres) and Light Industrial (47 acres). Covering seventy-eight acres the site is located at the northeast corner of Bixler Road and State Route 4 in the Discovery Bay area. The requested General Plan Amendment is shown on Map 1. II. CEQA AND RELATED PROJECTS An Environmental Impact Report on this project was prepared and determined to be adequate by your Commission. This general plan amendment staff report was drawn on information found in that EIR and is related to it's findings. Separate current planning applications have been applied for specifically rezoning #2968 from A-2, Heavy Agriculture to P-1; minor subdivision #39-91, and development plan #3031-91. Actions on these applications are dependent on final decisions on this.amendment. Separate staff reports will be prepared on these applications. III. PROJECT SETTING The site proposed for the project is located in eastern Contra Cost County. It is approximately 30 miles east of Martinez and 30 Miles west of Stockton. The regional location is shown in Map 2. More specifically, the site is located at the northeast corner of Bixier Road and State Route 4 (SR4), about 2.5 miles west of the SR 4 bridge over the Old River at the San Joaquin County Line. The site is bordered on the east by Discovery Bay, a primarily residential, water-oriented community currently under development by the Hofmann Company. Other nearby communities include Byron, about two miles to the -1- 11 woman; Im■■iw■■a■ri■/■was■ar11■■a■a■■■■i 1 ( towaww/ai#■am//R■a■w■11■!ms■■#/at lMl■imf!■/alae■■aa lemmRltowns Boom on (wallaaia/■mwm/:Ca/IIlia■■t wwa!■i :Ilwaa#■aa///aa///■a■wiii#!a■■■/m#t • - .- . Ilwlmla■■ami/■■wa■/■mallnaa■#Ra■■t - itmi/#■■iRi■■maw■atawillnlwl/!#!/a :ICCs■//■wwa■■■w■amaa■11■■a!a■■R!t Single Family Residential-High aIn1■naaaamlalwalaam/m/maalaa#ew/i1lalwBaumann lavnm 11:1!w■# #im inl■■awe/Maas/#/■amrmin■■■mummma ! !Iwla/wa■miaaw■■a!■■Mall■Rel n!w■■i i��!ii■��w�#/R��Ri■■a�tu■aii:�ll��iti � �.: K# ■ailirtan/nae■i ;L Commercial [ffllllll![Illlll{Ill �liaw/a/ia■w■R■t _ �iwiw/rsiawaaaaa rs.pi•ni.i•LEPINIM �tl�r j t i tt trrrrrrrrrrrrrrri Light IIIIIII[I[II[[�1[Illl �ialowmanowsommoom m/m//■wn/■a■ac ww..':' arrrrwrrs r rr r rr /Iy�V1A/\r11/��M�I 1■■■■■wal hrrwrrwr_w__r_r_ iwaaawwalAgricultural LandsHRamw■!a!a`w■■!■ti 1■■a■■sal �� fl■/m■■■w■/■:aww/■ � ��w illllllliilliiitaaeaaalaienrnwim!r#aaw.t v. � -.,,.ffi . lailawa■!/#!ms■ms +!*�!w'� ..►www I■■a■R■rea■■al/■l - i■aw/Rlawa■■a!■■r Imia■///aaawwaaa! k i�>!mn■!■!ism■■lwltns ll■■/rlae■lmmMaaa! f Ila■aa/awma�la■■■■#aa■Iia■#aawaaaa■ar/a/ l Hsn!/wawa■)laiaaaw■al 11awa■■lR:Nnaa■a■l r �c=ccs tatarr:rrataltit.G=.ZZ�rr= rSSS>r __ _ - -�+ 7°•i•■ lrlsiii mos::::uiMunummiailii■miiii � 11aw\/!■m■w/'a■wmwOa■X41M■a■■a■ww/ #■■r1 osaaaaall.ne#m:,Z'•iiTawawaflwaaa/!#/! a�aannummMmam■a$;aiamarr■w■■#R#■■■1 rw„ ltlwlt4m'am-11mammaaamammaala/ i� ��l■lialll/i/URltaail/a■t■:JI■■era■aaia■/■//1 .� ii Iswll/ulllauwuwwl leis!■-�lmaaamamair///a/1 w (ptillIng tommila■i/alBILIN itimnaua■■au�s.��l M_ �� nrr■■rr■■•n■uo•n r■ouuIUIIIIUII/II�V■■lrtrrrrrr.11lJ■■■r. '�� ' M4�p . ,it.raalw\tw■■tar■tatty. _ _ /tir'lwe� Inas weal some no■al l!a ■■wadi■wit m■nsti■m i 7a■MEMO■m■s assails a J =amt Rwwt aalamrrr.rr w !tw amrwnmt■a/ a■ ma/eiemmaawa■ra■ /mwm as n!!RNIRM 4 s■ mla �, � lr.f ctrl' r kt:��aaaiaaa■ul■aaa#aa i !!/■■■■/Awma!llmw//■a■ m 6DA� wma■atiwlsani■m/mw■■ _ wwr�rrnttarrrrrr mast/Mlm■OMNI ma liaala■■R eat _ aww:■imwmratliaawmmlw swat a■iwm■■Jla/■■rmm' ■mL irw�ns i Mwus=s�S>✓l ■i *wws \rs Jnr i now: ■ inL tivr a +.► ,t NONE • ■s m � C ■ ■wL r� le" I's w _ ■■aM1i1 awm■mi■ i gig woman c ■■ ■ aa�rar•eQ ■r■ur■ur■rrr■arty■■:tsweetir'iris�riwirsiis•. i+w..+w+—rr� (� r ■ il" rites%ili�N�a��iaaa/taws■a/aa�■was■#Maas i ■■w■ai■Aarliwaaam/r>tibia■#a■afamtlwa/aa■#w#wtwlaaawi mma//■a■m■■aaa■m■■illi!■rm■■a■aa■■■■aaaa■■mrw■R■■was■ ■/l//■iw/■swear#amwlii■■■w■/w■■■■mea■■law■amwmwarm/a■ ■awwr■i■■aaa■O■■w■■11■■mw■/■aa■lwmaw■waw!■■lrmaww■■R! laiaiwa■/raww/■/w■Allo■i!!a!M/a!a■!R!■■aawaamm■■/■wa! ■■a■a/saws■■a■■■■allr■aawmwa■/■■■■#■■aammwmm■■■■a■a! ■sew!//■w■awls■wealismafaafa#ii■ma/!laMaaala■iR■afros ■■aimawlwawawa■■sal i tni■■a■aaaawlr#/was■■■wm■ilei■■t j � %%Ar%��iiwl�ltli#i■a/aweiaaafwmmwa■iotmuam! ■/seamy■■a■■aw■■■■mlimam!■wales■a■■wawlmm■m■m■mmaNONE { ■ea■mm■w!#■R■aa■mmalIa-sNnmmaa■m■■lw/Raw:!#am son mama! ■■■m■ammw■■■■wwsaail•r"�mmm■mammwma■am■■awe■t■■■rw■ml ��r�rrrrrrrrrrr.F.�r�ltaaam■■iamw#/wamlaaem\wr/■tea#!m! I �I ��r�r5�i��ittwRRitl!■aaewaaawaiwana■'!■■ia#iaia■■sal■ w!wlRo Mason[Iowans,, !■was■#mmammwaa! M#nono a#waailiaia■Titaw/awawwaa■nlnm in#lanwtwr!■mma! ■w■no tlwma■11■wawwlim■w■#■a■■mew■aww onsommar■w!a■■rl a■■ai wwamalfaR■■■!Biwa■wlwa/sit■awe■t■wawR■ttaM/a■!a! !Immo nwewwII■■anal!-rr---�Tt2e!!!mm-tlwaw■■/tl■ew■lmlL Mania■away Ina/awl t#oma#ianlmaaeaw■tawaaawm lamwmm■! _ ■no Mwli/itlwa■■Ilawaa/maiaaiaii■!teslas/twwaa■Rai ! 'f n■i■■wlnl Iwa■na!1 ■wlance! Raalu aana■■anwlaa i■alnmm all n■ MiIi �l�Rwnia■wanwnwlitsiw# amRrr�i+wr:w! . iM � BYRON "-� GENERAL. PLAN AN�,)NDMENT PROJECT P SETTING AND EXISTING LAND USE '�':� ;;� `::�iy �:�:' :•:.•i: ��+�: :.fir.� �:�• �'� 4.7. .:��• •!'•::••. ••••'�":: '.t:. �:+: •J.•:::•.;ate•.�.� •.�;.»:;: ;:••:�: ••:•. •.:�, •: : ` •:•`,•:,• :��.: ' • • i • meq:,�` -� :,* ,r: ••�,�,�may,,.-.�� .. �i;. ..,•. r•.••;'::,•; "• •"*:• tom• ;i a•:, fir::;:•:�::::•:•:;:'r..:�`t:.`...r•; %fir' •:•. �i� --so.• • •.,•�• ;�;• •::'..•. :::"..,•. •.1 741. ... .� ::�•:•. .�.:•:"��:'t: •: :!"•.:: •:j! •moi•• :�::'•::.::'::: -`:':•I:':•:":::• -:moi ;s,:'�5 :`:••`• ..! ••••• :.•••:,' •;�:: :;:;;�:;..• JiAARiM�tEf� RD: /,/ .;.;: ,� ,, ♦ :J,:..s: j::. .�.::•; .» . BYRON 78 ` ••:a+•-, •r;1:••' •••�.'j, L�/.3\,,/,,�J1�, j\i:L♦ \ :;y::la�:J r,.. ::.•%:i :,r•• '� :r,:....: .::��'+�;:a is Sw;' �4'• :` 4�ti :..,. ..'�'. .• d.,.1`,.;�,.y:`:. `:••. ,...:;:.•.a:•.•;Fitly t�:�';: '' ':!�• '•�':•4•t•• Vit.:«;1:'t:•:""• ••:: `'.'.. .: ':t wa::••«v,:•.:;•:;:•a•:w.L:: ';.'; :s:..,;::%:,. : ::•`:.. '•i'.::::� .:. ;.ilii::::'; ALBERS ='t`",: :��r,;: °«: .: .rl.: ;.::::;::•::;•a; .,`, :;s •:. .�:; '~'Jf'.: r AGRICULTURE(NO RES.) • ;: :�:• .-`::° : :• �:t•::•r�. ::: - :..:,• /�!/�/i SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL •'•='~• a: %'tf:rt •: : ••••:••• MISCELLANEOUS IMPROVEMENTS �.�t:'�••• ... :• ' ::•':.:i :'t :i %-•:�" `,� •;tom: ";::: :{. :. = ''s:•':• :;: ' ALL VACANT PROPERTIES •::: ,` RURAL RESIDENTIAL .,:.::::•:":`'�; URBAN ACREAGE ♦i: M:••III:-,::•,�• - SCALE 1" 600" MAPdie h southwest via Bixler Road, Byer Road and Byron Highway;_ and Brentwood, between 4 and 4.5 miles to the northwest via SR 4. The site vicinity includes a flat landscape of traditional east-county rural uses, including agricultural activities (forage crops, grazing, etc.), and rural residential uses, as well as water-related suburban residential and commercial uses (Discovery Bay ). Land use on surrounding parcels is mixed. To the north and west are ranchettes South of the site, the land is generally in agricultural use. An exception is the southwest corner of SR 4 and Bixler Road, which is occupied by a boat repair and auto service facility. Directly to the east is Discovery Bay, a planned residential-recreational community whose development was first authorized by the county in 1965. Discovery Bay was initially envisioned to appeal primarily to second home buyers attracted by the ready access it provides to the waterways of the Delta. Boat.ownership is very high. The Discovery Bay planned community is a self-contained, water oriented suburban residential development with associated commercial, recreational, and institutional uses. Adjacent to the western project boundary is the location of the Albers General Plan Amendment and development proposal. A general plan amendment, rezoning, and service district boundary change is proposed for this adjacent seventy-four acre site to accommodate 280 residential units and a small commercial center. The project has an EIR completed on it and shall be considered in a similar time frame to the request. Northeast of the project site on Bixler Road and adjacent to the existing Discovery Bay development is the site of the pending Hofmann general plan amendment and development (a.k.a. Discovery Bay West), a proposed 1,400-unit single-family residential subdivision with 6,000-to-10,000-square-foot lots and recreation facilities. This proposal is embryonic in terms of process,has recently been revised substantially by the applicant and is about to begin the CEQA process. The location of these other proposals is shown on Map 3. IV. EXISTING SITE CHARACTERISTICS . This 78 acre site was historically used for grazing (before 1985) but is has been idle since that time. The Stovie Index for this site is Grade 5, which indicates poor suitability for intensive farming because of drainage problems and soil alkalinity. Four high-voltage power lines transverse the site in a northwest-southeast direction. Easements for these lines occupy a band approximately 520 feet in width, entering -2- BYRON GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT LOCATION OF ADJACENT PROPOSALS 0 DR gx OR CIS • _ 4�4\;:;Lr}.,.}trJ,F;rj ti+y?:+'`'1h = " • ::.:.:%::::M:i:'v: 'iii:�:',v'i:4�t}:+}qv: • '��:�f:�'''g,"4iy+'f.•,::'r'y:nr f%rj`�`,"�'.ft,F". _ '' .�.. _: _a,...-.. -. - i. ,•�`�.. •,nn T:• . •...� ?i +,'��•'�•• '+:::%"ci;:?v',+=•`;''.,�i•`f.•,�-'3.�•'Nn`"ti:`::�.KM:i Cis - PS f DISCOVERY BAY WEST ra. Ar E. `..� Aiv.ii:\rvvL,},ri:L:{:sfi,:.yfi+^v=:v'{•:3'¢' `E i WA ANA _ WA PS M SQA , AC r > > SIA .. 7.M!; A t r f ALBERS YRON 7 � 8 " 1 ' DR ` .LEGEND - - !� MAA .��"• „ = t• o SV Single Family Residential-Very Low SH SM Single Family Residential-Medium P SH Single Family Residential-High �.._f ��.• Co u ML Multiple Family Residential-low MM Multiple Family Residential-Medium CO Commercial T' a U Light Industrial ' AL' CR Commercial Recreation PS Public/Semi-Public PR Parks and Recreation OS Open Space AL Agricultural NORTH .,..+.:�..... PSAC Agricultural Cores SCALE: 11 w 0 `•` .L DR Delta Recreation &Resources M" �,�� a7Wi.iG`: i� _ �FV{/V' '1�•• �a •.•�,,,� 1�'itli� WA Wofnr the site on its northern boundary and continuing southeasterly so that the western boundary of the easement lies just ori the southeast corner-of.the site State Route 4. In the current condition, 30 feet of clearance between the site grade and the power lines is maintained. There is no landscaping or other vegetation, nor any structure, within the existing easements. The two westerly lines are 500kV transmission lines owned by the Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E). These lines form the Pacific Intertie, and integral part of the western states power network that delivers electricity from the Pacific Northwest to California. The two easterly lines are owned by the Western Area Power Administration (WAPA). They include the Shasta-Tracy/Cottonwood-Tracy 230kV transmission and the Tray-Contra Costa-Ygnacio 69kV transmission line. V. EXISTING COUNTY GENERAL PLAN The project site is within the general plan designated Urban Limit Line. The purpose of the Urban Limit Line is to identify and insure protection of agricultural lands and open space areas by establishing a line beyond which no large-scale development may be considered within the duration of the general plan (i.e., until 2005). A property's location within the Urban Limit Line does not necessarily guarantee that it my be developed during the general plan's time period. Properties located inside the Urban Limit line are still governed by the other land use designations and provisions contained in the general plan, and are also subject to all the goals, policies, and implementation measures included in each general plan element. The application of these policies may preclude the development of reduce the allowable intensity of development of certain properties. The Urban Limits Line portion which affects this area is shown in Map 4. The land use designation for the site is Agricultural Lands. General Plan land use designations for the site and surrounding area are shown on Map 5. The Agricultural Lands designation is generally assigned to privately owned rural lands in the county, and generally excludes lands with prime agricultural soils or lands located in or near the Delta. The purpose of the Agricultural Lands designation is to "preserve and protect lands capable of and generally used for the production of food, fiber, and plant materials" on non-prime soils. In the flat, eastern portion of the county where the project site is located, this category is primarily given to non-prime agricultural lands which are planted in orchards. Lands west of the ULL are designated in the General Plan as "Agricultural Core". This land use category permits all land-dependent and non-land-dependent agricultural production and related activities. Additional uses - including facilities for processing agricultural products produced in the County, commercial agricultural support -3- BYRON 78.. GENERAL PLAN AM"�MMENT EXIST :,G GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP PS DRs - - DR • r, P. W n 0 1, _ 1: . t T AC CIS AL os WAa PSS ML f A WA I w I WA - 0 M OOR CR _ p� i 1 PS M M rJ - I SM AC .I � � • PR I I PR Pa I - - - T ML= A .,. {I Ll .. I Urban Limit Line PsDR IL LEGEND 'i sM •" SV Single Family Residential-Very Low t... s ., M v '��.... '• . . ........-.,.��_ _ _.� _ _ .... ._::. "�" �- SM Single Family Residential-Medium SH SH Single Family Residential-High SH Ps ML Multiple Family Residential-Low co a MM Multiple Family Residential-Medium Q CO Commercial _ U Light Industrial - - CR Commercial Recreation -.. AL PS Public/Semi-Public _ ... \ 4* PR Parks and Recreation OS Open Space NORTH - _ AL Agricultural Lands 6, .., .,... PS AC Agricultural Core s SCALE: 1" = 4000" _ DR Delta Recreation & Resources MAP 4 li _ WA Water facilities; and small-scale visitor-serving uses - are allowed upon issuance of a use permit. The maximum residential density in this area is one unit per 40 acres, and subdivisions which would create clusters of "ranchette" housing are permitted. The General Plan designations for Discovery Bay, which lies immediately east of the project site, include single family residential - medium density (3.0 to 4.9 units per acre), single family residential - high density (5.0 to 7.2 units per net acre), multiple family residential - low density (7-12 units per net acre), commercial, commercial recreation, light industrial, park and recreation, public/semi-public, general open space and water. The Draft EIR discusses the relationship of the proposed General Plan amendment and related development applications to the policies of the County General Plan (on pages 23 and 24). For the readers convenience this is added as attachment A to this report and that attachment has been augmented with general plan wetland policies which may apply to this project. The circulation Element map lists both State Route 4 and Bixler Road as Existing Arterials. State Route 4 is designated as a Scenic Route. VI. AREA ZONING The existing zoning for the site is shown on map 5. The site is currently zoned A-3: Heavy Agriculture. VII. URBAN SERVICES The Draft EIR in Chapter III (pages 73-84) discusses public services in great detail and that section can be referred to for further insight on this issue. Since the site is currently planned for agricultural purposes most public service providers have not planned for suburban growth on this land and will need to adjust their plans in consideration of these applications. The identified service providers in the DEIR are: Water - Contra Costa Sanitary District 19 Sewer - Contra Costa Sanitary District 19 Police - Sheriff's Dept. Fire - East Diablo Fire Protection District For the services of police and fire, the issue is insuring that the fees are adequate to offset the costs of providing adequate facilities and levels of service. This can best be addressed as part of the conditions of approval should the General Plan amendment be approved. -4- BYRON GENERAL PLAN ANI.,.,�NDMENT ZONING AJ + A-20 � •� — T A3 1 • it w T 1 �1 a 1 1 I 1 1711 Ai A3 • i!i� .i??Y.Y vi�:i:???:{•:tifvr::}i v.':iC��:::k<:•.�M1•i.:? _ MARSH CREEK RD JACIMIm --- -----— :rr r.Kf_1: L ii vYrfS.{•:\�%4• fl. 1 •�'if•)i{.•q�'C$.'J•;s�:•'f.•titii}•3.:i{.:}�y :.3'Fifr is T <k$ BYRON 78 f ` • rA�tv{i{;:i5:;i.`•4i4{';2;`r A:-.�v�.vi:::{1 N};fif SIR`':::iY"�:::v..:.rt•.:6:j:t fi Elz STATE HIGHWAY 4 •�..:::x...:>•>:,:>:�'.;i,.;.f`':c�x^;`'s.{�f. A•2 • LEGEND A-2 General Agriculture . + A-3 Heavy Agriculture �. A-20 Exclusive Agricultural NORTH P-1 Planned Unit Development SCALE 1- 600" MAP 5 The issues of provision of sewer and water services have clear policy ramifications which need to be considered as part of a General Plan process, as well as, meeting growth management standards as part of the rezoning and subdivision applications. The main policy issue which effects both this application and-the Albers request deals with the development history of Discovery Bay. Discovery Bay was approved as a self contained community and Sanitation District 19 was expressly created to provide water and sewer services to Discovery Bay. This request for service by that agency would require sphere of influence amendments and annexations by LAFCO. In weighing the merits of these applications , this shift in policy needs to be clearly recognized. Sanitation District 19 has indicated that they are undertaking a service facility study on the feasibility of serving the pending General Plan amendment areas (See Attachment B). Given that district's willingness to study service to the area, water and sewer services should not be considered a limitation for considering this general plan amendment. Verification of capacity to serve needs to be finalized in review of rezoning and subdivision application on the site. VIII. AGRICULTURAL IMPACTS The agricultural character of land.in this part of the county has been reinforced by several factors. Until recently, this area has been too far removed form the urbanized areas of Contra Costa County to have experienced development pressure. The continuation of intensive farming in the Delta has lent support to continued grazing uses on lands less suitable for row cropping. Drainage problems, seasonal flooding and proneness to significant flooding pose problems for most kinds of development, therefore presumably keeping land values at a level supportable by grazing use. Soils in the vicinity of the site range from good to poor in their suitability for agriculture. According to the Soil Survey of Contra Costa County, California, the best soils, with Storie Index ratings of 1 and 2, are found south and west of SR 4. More specifically, they are about 700 feet south and 1.1 miles west of the site, and cover between 800 and 900 acres. Between the site and the Class 1 soils to the west, the soils are rated 3 and 5. The Class 5 soils on the site extend southerly to the nearby Class 2 soils. Storie Index 5 soils are not suitable for cultivation. The project site is largely Marcuse clay, a very poorly drained soil, often affected by alkaline conditions and of limited valve for agriculture. The site has not been used agriculturally since 1985. Over time, as central and east county development continues, pressures to develop lands in this part of the county will continue and areas to the west, lands may be seen as suitable for industrial and commercial uses that serve an urban market as well as uses that have grown up to serve agricultural and recreational markets. This is especially true of those lands within the ULL. -5- IX. WETLAND AND RELATED SENSITIVE SPECIES ISSUES In response to California Fish and Game concerns major discussion of this issue is to be found in the Final EIR on pages 43 through 56. That letter and its response is Attachment B to this report. The basic finding is that 33.7 acres of land meets the technical criteria of the jurisdictional waters of the United States and includes both wetlands and drainage channels: this is 46% of the project site. Map # 6 shows the distribution of wetlands on the site, even if relocated, and the County general plan policies to protect and setback development form wetland areas will constrain the amount of development which could be allowed. Development of the site, however, would necessitate the drafting of a wetland restoration clan, whereby new wetlands are created to replace those that are lost. While it is possible to create high quality wetlands, it is unlikely that those wetlands associated with alkali sink scrub cannot be easily duplicated because they require specific soil types, alkalinity and other conditions. Thus, the project may contribute to a cumulative loss of alkali sink scrub, for which no mitigation can be provided. San Joaquin kit fox, a California threatened and federally endangered species, is known to occur in eastern Contra Costa and Alameda Counties. The best known populations are in the Los Vaqueros and Bethany Reservoir areas. These have both been the focus of intensive California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) Studies. The primary habitat of the Byron 78 site, a form of valley sink scrub, would be considered suitable kit fox habitat. Ground squirrels were abundant on the site near the edges of the property and along the channel that bisects the site. Ground squirrel burrows were relatively common in these areas. No appropriately sized or shaped burrows that could serve as kit fox dens were found. This does-not support high quality habitat such as that found in the Byron Hot Springs area. The site does, however, provide foraging habitat suitable for kit fox. Kit fox denning cannot be ruled out; however, much better denning habitat appears to be present on sites to the west of the Byron 78 site. A kit fox survey was conducted for the this property and its summary conclusion reads" "No evidence was detected of kit foxes on the Byron 78 property on the.LSA survey. Suitable habitat exists for the San Joaquin kit fox on at least part of the project site. Prey appears to be available and potential dens are present. The nearest known record for kit fox in the project vicinity is 2.5 miles away. The project site is also within the USFWS mapped distribution of San Joaquin kit fox distribution. The project site, while possible kit fox habitat, is peripheral is terms of the actual distribution of species. The conclusion is there is a low potential for the San Joaquin kit fox to occur on the project site in terms of regular use." From a County staff perspective, the San Joaquin kit fox is not factor in this decision; should Federal and State agencies come to a different conclusion they will need to negotiate that directly with the developer. -6- h X. ANALYSIS OF THE REQUEST When Discovery Bay was originally envisioned in the early 1960 it was to be marketed toward the second home market and for this. reason the project was planned to have limited non-residential facilities. Given the, substantial growth of the County and adjacent areas, Discovery Bay marketing shifted early in its development to focus on a high quality residential living environment of year round homes. This history has resulted in the Discovery Bay community being deficient in places to shop, eat, or conduct business. One of the main purposes of this proposal is to make up the deficiency of this original Discovery Bay changing circumstances by providing commercial facilities outside of but immediately adjacent to the community. O Wetlands Issues Without a doubt, the biggest constraint to this development is the identification of areas which meet the technical criteria of jurisdictional wetlands according to U.S. Corp of Engineers criteria. It is quite likely that Discovery Bay itself was built on large acreage of wetlands but given the regulatory procedures in affect at that time, wetlands were not a constraint to it's development. The Final EIR determines that 31 .3 acres meet the criteria for wetlands; that's slightly over 40% of the acreage of the site. This, when coupled with County general plan policies requiring setbacks from marshes, will further limit the amount of available lands which can be utilized. County policy on setbacks reads: "A setback from the edge of any wetland area may be required for any new structure. The breadth of any such setback shall be determined by the County after environmental review examining (a) the size and habitat value of the potentially affected wetland, and (b) potential impacts on the wetland, and adjacent uplands, arising out of the development and operation of the new structure. Unless environmental review indicates that greater of lesser protection is necessary or adequate, setbacks generally will be between 50 and 100 feet in breadth." A review of Map #6 clearly shows that trying to proceed with this project based on the existing marsh constraint could lead to a very fragmented design and it might limit, not protect, the species which are dependent on the marsh. The Final EIR adds a mitigation measure which reads "Either (1) redesign the proposed project so that any impacts on wetlands are avoided, or (2) provide alternative mitigation, acceptable to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the California Department of Fish and Game and Contra Costa County Development Department, that results in no net loss of either wetland habitat values or wetland acreage." -7- MENT BYRON ; GENERAL PLAN A1ViL WETLANDS AREAS MEETING THE TECHNICAL CRITERIA OF JURISDICTIONAL WETLANDS 4-1 Q, AMUMmWngV*T*dmiCW' : t l� x �; ` �l• s cftnrqw Toulm waucs at to ted Sta4s ~\_'-_. �.._.. ` .A IDo'SETBACK Ok ' , ��:>::x=s..: rs;- :Kt•r. ;. yam.•- c � � � l� t';asFrYt`,..,°}-•.5,}'y+�.a-.v �. ! '':mac,-.%q •- "' • t ` •",., n.ritalt:!•5:. y,;:cf:w..}�..:: a'-:':.."1;:r::�G�. i •t L �,t •iso.;:.zX�',:y'`v�,�'-'�'•''�,'Hca'"'t;."v.•.,�.'r.',5'�,4`.'}v'':1:;.'u•tk� t' _ rt! wi:}moi i''a:i•w:�::::5:^•- � , A .:,.•r�r-'•.: %fi c. ,u;t'' •?ik g?CX. ,r,.;.:}:i^,.•,?!i�?S•-a✓.•:�i;%�• r'r:•` ' \ - •.:'�:?"'.'.„�9::.'K.�s:' .�k."st'�,1••�,tc:3.s'%^y'sr :.yy`••fi°�'�.:^5' f:.�.^:�F{e' `:::�:':=°% 5'�.,,y~.y''?.•'c%y,��:-.'�' :;�,. S'iY:::t:.•. ,r• .`:fir-'�.:;:".�s:''..::2: �-='rc:::rr��:' aka: 'Sc 5}• +c�:' '�": /: .'S''��,:.•.. tj ?,.o:•15::3..••. 5 .. Y:iaa: .tt,,„•�.', S'1.;.?�i:' :'•;�ii-'.�yi:;. 4y;r ,'.{:0•�5:% �•:� �,_p. ;, 1 .?k.••. } Y' �^�.�'•'-:.X`9�=:5::Syrn:„�:5•}.:c'.r(yf.::i:�2..:L''<.:q:�tc�..;✓' .. T /3KF IG:K.y .u,...: n fc k. s};'G`�'o, a': `: :yrs%t a!� xF►: yfY55:?i: t:'.'.. ` +F ••• .6s s:�'A h��j'lY,`;•:y' '��is `•��+� j± '•'..'•Y fir,:?' -:a'es'�:�•,•!ate,., ,.�..ry.'!:}%�,:,L.i��-'•;:5`:�"' • 1 t _.` ::,Gr.�F's-}:is';tt'. }'#:j+ ;r},'•..trd $ '?? ''::o' .-.'. ae }?};P'i �'. ::y.'. :.. HK�y.:.....s� s'� '%::-''�•s; ��,� :i%�,...;}: rye..• ' :ay;M::.':w; .:-�•5.::Yi�GG�;?�£%,�x i'':,.• :a�ry'''.•iw^�.••:avr 5 •�'wi�� "`�¢ �� r'��it'• :^,fir• a"` .o�: •::a:. �•y,. Nr•��.��-333... ',ir,��::'y"••''y :' xiSY'�T.:`y.•,.''ww+`.,"?'•Y•. yxvr i:.tr._•�,ta.y. .:aE'' -"w'v�• ..3yt,X . • �''� { a :.iii '4'.`a Yy. A: kt ;f _ i• %s ' . .:,ti vrr _ a' .,.}.Vit; :.t' Sj'' _ tsts.•' � t�•:i�3:5K;:G'�'"w� •'.;tts"`••w+f�=sA.+S g".yt•`5� �g....w;.:::�: . � ;1?':.:'a'.��i r::}t �1a"-'��;: "��'•. ��s '- ?r.�y .31y .•1• •.?r'}',hY.•"';:.�•Tsi• 5} r:':KT:.:.913Y..: " ?5: a".�• - }�•t ':Xc�t' �:=�� 1 SsE;.r•+y�,',:..•;,�•"- ,a•'•�mow. n .;$s"••" 6 .v':'•'{'."•1`. it::. w� 5�`5.'•.q,:•i�J,.:'•5;?ttst•. t..'•5'Ft�•� y 3i!5?}�;"r�y.':r�i:t•.ti*' wY•}w.. _.5C7'�:. 'ay': :k}r �1 _{ ai ' .,ao':•% ice:f vi:f" art•.,%. s}c��1s�°�� ! ._` , low ' 't., �Y.,•5 v? k •"tri"'.•: ��r'''"y � "'" ::k'•i1':i5s?',1,?:�'r'�'=•r.s. ur. �}s�Ga�ikizt .'.t.rr' �,„„'' I 11�� cbs.�.}it:..t �wc!a� ,e¢s':�{,�,�"'t3..•y1.':.a:.:•;:;5`31,.�<•sr;'Ciy. � � � t � 200 400 400 i. s ' Byron 78 Ga3►nora! Ptah Amendment E1R MAP 6 If commercial uses are desirable to serve the Discovery Bay Community, then those uses need to be located at the intersection Bixler and State Route 4. Under Federal wetland rules the amount of acreage impacted changes the type of permit required. In any case to allow commercial uses on the site will require impacting wetland areas. From both a planning and a wetland impact basis, it would appear better to attempt to consolidate the areas which can be developed and to attempt to preserve larger more logical areas for wetlands and upland habitat. There is an east-west drainage ditch which might be logical to serve as a dividing boundary between preserved wetland and open space areas and development locations. Consideration should be given for clustering development on the south of this drainage canal and preserving the area to the north as enhanced wetland. O Power Lines As previously indicated four power lines exist on the site and a new PG&E -PGT pressurized gas pipeline project, which will bring material gas supplies from Canada to Central California, is approved across this site. Both PG&E and WAPA regulate uses that lie underneath their lines and near transmission towers, based largely on restrictions outlined Rules for Overhead Electric Line Construction, General Order No. 95 of the California Public Utilities Commission. The applicable regulations include: ■ A minimum of 30 feet vertical clearance between conductors and final grade. ■ No grading that results in the creation of standing water in the easement. ■ No structures or overhangs allowed within the easement. ■ Landscaping and lighting standards not to exceed a height of 15- feet at maturity. ■ Drip line of all trees at least six feet from all (power line) structures. ■ Maintenance of access for large maintenance vehicles through the easement and to each structure. Such maintenance requires clearance of 25 feet around each tower, and asphalt pavement to support a 100,000 pound, three axle vehicle. ■ Grounding of longitudinal metal fencing. ■ Highway-type barrier protection around tower footings. ■ Review of building and grading plans by the agencies to determine that proper clearance from the conductors is maintained. -8- These guidelines will greatly reduce the useability of lands under the power lines. • Recognizing this, the applicant has proposed boat and RV storage. One difficulty with boat and RV storage is that standing vehicles have the tendency to drip oils and gasoline onto the ground. Given that some of the transmission easement area is identified as wetlands and that storing of;vehicles could drip into the soil and find a way into the marsh. The need for a corp permit-to allow for this use is improbable: All consideration of RV and boat storage should be dropped. O Light Industrial Area As previously indicated on the discussion of wetlands it would appear appropriate to consolidate wetlands on the northern portion of the site and to eliminate the use of the proposed Light Industrial area. On page 12 of the DEIR it indicated the applicant recognized that ground water quality was critical to the area and that "The applicant intends that these light industrial uses be restricted to exclude the following types of facilities that would otherwise be permitted, or conditionally permitted, in a light industrial district: plants that involve processing, fabricating or hot mix; asphalt plants; rendering plants; food processing plants; and tanneries. The applicant also proposes that there would be no commercial storage of flammable liquids or hazardous wastes.within the light industrial component of the site plan." Given the wetland situation and that ground water quality is crucial to Discovery Bay, as well as, this area for water supply, all further consideration of Light Industrial use should be permanently dropped. o Public Services As previously indicated the policy issues surrounding the provision of water and sewer facilities is the key determinate on if this area develops or not. Sanitation District 19 is investigating whether or not and how it could serve this area. The County's Growth Management policies also need to be complied with. Adoption of this general plan amendment can occur prior to full resolution of provision of water and sewer service; however, that will need to be resolved prior to finalization of current planning decisions on this matter. o Other Land Use Concepts The only other land use concept that might be viable for this. site is to develop the area residentially. As was previously indicated, however, their is a need to provide business opportunities to the Discovery Bay area and the best location for that to occur at Bixler and State Route 4. Since the land south of SR4 is outside the Urban Limits Line (UI) the only practical locations along an arterial (e.g. State Route 4) is at Bixler Road. Focussing on commercial uses with some land available for office use appears appropriate. Even in the area south of the Drainage easement wetlands exist. No structures are allowed within the power line easement areas. Only non-structural uses should be allowed within the power line easement south of the east-west drainage canal and these should be limited in scale and scope. All the easement area should be maintained as Agricultural Lands on the land use element. -9- ,1 o Text Limitations The discussion, to this point, is to cluster development south of the east-west drainage line in recognition of the need for logical location for non-residential land uses. The only way this will be allowed by Federal and State regulatory agencies is if adequate mitigation for lost wetlands can occur. For logical planning purposes the County should move toward-clustering development or the southern end of the site recognizing that portions the northern portion of the property will be placed in restrictive deeds. If, on the other hand, regulatory agencies won't allow the marsh to be relocated, then flexibility is needed in interpretation of this plan amendment. The addition of text which allows for flexibility of interpretation of this plan to meet the needs of regulatory agencies while insuring preservation of wetland areas is needed in the plan text. o Other Sensitive Species The final EIR calls for additional studies during the spring from February through April for fairy shrimp,tiger salamander,curved footed by grotus diving beetles. While these studies are not required at a General Plan level of detail, they need to be completed prior to the granting of any planning entitlements on this property. X. RECOMMENDATION: Recommend approval of the Byron 78 General Plan Amendment as modified by the attached plan map and text. 2/rYiec/kd/byroni78.rpt 1-15-93 -10- Byron 78 General Plan Amendment Proposed Changes to the County General Plan To integrate the Byron 78 General Plan Amendment into the County General Plan, the General Plan Land Use Element (foldout) map will be changed to redesignate land USC for approximately 78 acres of land. The plan designations and boundaries are shown on Map A attached. On page 3-59, after the policies for Southeast County Area, a new section on Discovery Bay should be added and the Discovery Bay area should be added to Figure 3-2 which shows "Unincorporated Communities with Adopted Area Policies." The new text to be added on page 3-59 should read: POLICIES FOR THE DISCOVERY BAY AREA "3-9X The Byron 78 project area at the northeast corner of Bixler Road and State route 4 shall have development concentrated as shown on the land use plan south of the east-west drainage canal which crosses the middle of the site. Areas designated as Agricultural Lands will be utilized for enhancement as marsh and wetlands areas to off-set the lost wetlands in the southern portion of the site. Given the need to negotiate wetlands mitigations with State and Federal regulatory agencies, it may be necessary to flexibly interpret these plan boundaries in review of development applications. JC:kd 1-19-93 pcb78.gpa 1 IIIIIIIlIIIiI!!iill' 'm••••"• 0.00.0""" LEGEND i00 1.■■■■m.■00m00N00M.mM■MMI,a■.... .20. mosonsibamm on 1.mmma■mmmm■■m■mm■nm.f I■m■■■■Single Family Residential-Medium 10 emmmaiinamon ■■201 I■■m■■mom■/Nm.MNm.m■■I lam■1 Mma■ar \\Office 1/■/■■/ssmm■■■..■■/■■f IN/■1■.■■201 ■■.■■■\■■■■.■■■■■.\■11aone■■■mmr 1■/■0000■■.//■■■■mm■Mm■f lmmtlrm■■/■r losommm 1M■mmm■mumm■■mommon■ml lamml■■■.201 Commercial I.■M.\a■■.....■M■■..MIIaM.1■.N.N1 Light �.��■_._._■a■.MMPI IrM��■MteM1 Industry ■■■■.■\■■.■■■/■r Illlllllllll�llllli 1■.■■■■■I r.rrrrrrrr��rr�� 0000. .J Agricultural LandsAgricultural Core i■■■■■..■■..■■■■1 11 � I i■■.■aN.■■mNMa■■1 _,�, 0000,,,• z�� Waterww�rw f�l iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir �� t II II II II II 10000■.0000/■00t■■0000/r �ehn_►w�nrs.- � I�f IfIII{Illlllfll 1■mm.m■mmmma■■mm1 ��r -..,w►-�� iiiiiii� dill" � H■■iiii.�■■I1.�/M.aMM1 I■■m■■.mom■■■■■NI �1111111� OnommM■■■■rl■■■■■.MMI 1..00.■■0020■.■■■■■1 ---- now a i ♦f..0 sam■■1!\■■20.0.■ -MEN■■/■•■msm■■al ----0000 n....■.■■■1:.■■20-__= IMM■■■■\■■•■aN■■1 ;I ��■I.■■e■■.. ' of■■■.■a■■■■■■■ml 0000 J10��■11>♦�ISYM11■s11M11a r■ 1■■■..■a.■■MMa/al I■II■111111.11011.■1is7a1■ IM■■MN■MtOMMa■■NIitsw� !7.1 moms■■■1 on e.l ion I■■■■EMs■■m■■■■■ ---- J•11.a■11■■Mra■■■11■■ Im■/■■■■■MONO■m■ ■1■■■1■.M1■■■■11■■ la•M■sms■■■■t■■M. 1-1404 rA■otso■Moss■■■■■ ■ O■■ uaamo■■■s■■■■■ml 7■ wE " 1, 7.■1m■■1s■■s■■■■■.■ I.a■■■•■ammoo■■I I: ■1■■�e�Me.20m■■\M■ .la■■■•.•moss■ma\■I Emmons NEI I��..Inu. ■..oar-=r=�:�e�tTr�:. aI■t■\■M■o■■■■ ��.. �/1R� .■slssma■ssllts■N■■/■ .Im■t■manam■mmM■■■■mmlrfrt� I` ■ sillissmix nun am ■■r mmosom■Nlaiiiiii on r ■SI ■ ^^ iiiiilaiiiiii� iiiiI NEW • ■s -Airrrarrrr . 0NmO■MO■r2mannNo,l NOR 1100:0:11111111111111■■aamaa.■■■■ Mom■s■soo■■■om ■•■mmmm■m■■■I ■ ■. ,�;i�; W w ■■■■t■■Ntm■tN■■■■tOl osl ■■a.lc yr ■■■.OaMN..a■■■aa.■\I \ \■MI ■■\ IL NMI Mai 10011i ■masommsmmssssmmsmol so ■moN1 onommanown ■ass■■■■a■■m■■■amm■I no 1 ■■■■■ m■m■■moa■m■■■mN■■I 1 ■■■■■ ■■■t+,■■t■■■m■•N•e7■I ■Msa■C 111 0000■00�a■m000000maaMam■■1 ommum- i 0000 iiiGi ii iif�i�i■i�i■.20■.■..■..�..20■m..■■r i' I ■■■a■■■■■.■.■..■.Ori 1.■■■■■N■■.■■■..■..■M...1..MSMO1 ■■MO■■.■\■.■0000■■..1 1■■■■■as■\■■0000.■.N■■.■s■■.■■..■1 ■0000■■.■■0.11■■■..Mal r■..Oa.mssM■■MaM.O20■■NN.emM.■Ms1 ■■■ma■■■■■11■■■■■■M11■■Mom■ms■■■■■M■■■..■.■■■■■.■ms1 ■■M■■■s■■■oom■o■■a111111■!■.■■■■■.■.■st■■■.s■■■■■.am1 ■MMsiMm..MM.M■■.Msl ■ansommommo■mom■■ommoommems■■sO1 ■■■■sa■■■■m■■Ma■NEI ■■a.■■m■■■o..s■■o■■s.MNNM■■■■■■I 111111111192 SLANNEENO ■ma•■o..■omM\■■.■■I ■■■.■■■■\■.N■■■■■O■■■.■.■■■■■\■I ■■■osommo■m■s■■s.■I1111111 Emmons■■M■■.■■■msN■■■■■Ms1 ■■■■■Mom■a..■■ ■■■ ■■II■■■o■■sa.NMMMs■■..sNN■■.■■s■1 i 1 ■mM■a.■■.■MM/■II.MMI ■■il■■■N■■N■■■■■mm■stt■■MO■M■■sm1 ■■■■111.■■11■II■■■■■I ■■M■s.M■■.■s■■.MIOs■.■NN■■a.Mms1 ■■■as1M■■■■II■■■■■1 ■■■■M■■■■■■MSN■■1■■■■■Me.■■■osml ■t■■1.■■■NII■■e■■I ■■■■O■■s■■s..sMs1m.MMs■■/sss.s■I .m■■/■■■mMll■maANli■.M■■■■MON.■■■.1■■■.■.�M■■■Msm1 wool Mammal loM20um1NORTH .��r�rr�.�..rr.1O■■o■■�■■■■NOMI onsommommommi soo1 ■■MMI IM■.MMI ■M■■MM■oM■■■■■.■IOOM■■MN.o.M■■MI ��\■■I1.■■MMI ■■.■..sa■■■■.M.■1■■■■.m■m..mms■1 . If ATTAMENT A f The Land Use Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan, 1990-2005 includes the following policies which may be relevant to the proposed project: Jobs Housing Balance 3-2. Job infill shall be supported- and stimulated where the jobs/housing ratio shows an overabundance of housing to jobs. Growth Management. 65.135 Land Plan, and Urban Limit Line 3-5. New development within unincorporated areas of the County may be approved, providing growth management standards and criteria are met or can be assured of being met prior to the issuance of building permits in accordance with the growth management. 3-6. Development of all urban uses shall be coordinated with provision of essential community services or facilities including, but not limited to, roads, law enforcement and fire protection services, schools, parks, sanitary facilities,water and flood control. 3-9. Areas not suitable for urban development because of the lack of avail- ability of public facilities shall remain in their present use until the needed infrastructure is or can be assured of being provided. f 3-10.The extension of urban services into agricultural areas outside the Urban Limit Line, especially growth-inducing infrastructure, shall be generally discouraged. 3.11.Urban uses shall be expanded only within an Urban Limit Line where conflicts with the agricultural economy will be minimal. Business and Employment Uses 3-36.New local convenience shopping shall generally be located at the inter- sections of major streets and highways. Such uses shall be discouraged on more than'two corners of an intersection. 3-37.Business and professional office development shall be encouraged in areas designated for commercial land use within shopping centers and where a transition or buffer use is appropriate between commercial and residential areas. 3-40.1he continuing orderly development of research facilities, regional offices, and light industrial uses shall be encouraged in designated areas in order to improve the economic base and provide local employment. 23 3-41.Industrial development shall be concentrated in select locations adja- cent to existing major transportation corridors and facilities. 3-42.Industrial employment centers shall be designed to be unobtrusive and, harmonious with adjacent areas and development. Land Use 3-46.7his Plan directs most of the residential and commercial growth that is anticipated to occur in the unincorporated East County area during the planning period into the Oakley community,with smaller amounts of recreation-oriented development allowed on Bethel Island. The Growth Management Element contains the following goals and policies which may be relevant: 4-1. New development shall not be approved in unincorporated areas unless the applicant can provide the infrastructure which meets the traffic level of service and performance standards outlined in Policy 4-31, or a funding mechanism has been established which will provide the infra- structure to meet the standards or as is stated in other portions of[the] Growth Management Element. 42. If it cannot be demonstrated prior to project approval that levels of 1 service will be met per Policy 4-1, development will be temporarily deferred until the standards can be met or assured. Projects which do not, or will not, meet the standards shall be scheduled for hearing before the appropriate hearing body with a staff recommendation for denial, on the grounds that the project is inconsistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of the Growth Management Element of the County General Plan. Performance standards defined in the Growth Management Element are discussed in the public services section of this chapter(pp.73-84). Wetland Areas 8-k. A setback from the edge of any wetland area may be required for any new structure. The breadth of any such setback shall be determined by the County after environmental review examining (a) the size and habitat value of the potentially affected wetland, and (b) potential impacts on the wetland, and adjacent uplands, arising out of the development and operation of the new structure. Unless environmental review indicates that greater or lesser protection is necessary or adequate, setbacks generally will be between 50 and 100 feet in breadth. Expansions or other modifications of non-habitable agriculturally-related structures existing as of 1990 shall be exempt from this setback requirement. Parcels which would be rendered unbuildable by application of this standard shall also be exempt. 8-1 Permit minor landfill (less than one acre)or other land reclamation for water-oriented uses only if a finding has been adopted by the planning body that verifies no alternative site is available, and if public benefits clearly exceed public detriments from the loss of open water or tidelands areas. 8-m. The County shall require avoidance,minimization and/or compensatory mitigation techniques to be employed with respect to specific development projects having a potential to affect a wetland. In evaluating the level of compensation to be required with respect to any given project, (a) on-site mitigation shall be preferred to off-site and in-kind mitigation shall be preferred to out-of-kind, (b) functional replacement ratios may vary to the extent necessary to incorporate a margin of safety reflecting the expected degree of success associated with the mitigation plan, and (c) acreage replacement ratios may vary depending on the relative functions and values of those wetlands being lost and those being supplied. To the extent permitted by law, the County may require 3:1 compensatory mitigation of any project affecting a "Significant Wetland". 8-n. Urge the appropriate State and federal agencies to implement a rigid and frequent inspection system of all industrial facilities along the shoreline which have the potential of creating hazardous spills. 8-o. Adopt an emergency response plan which outlines how to ensure the swift construction of floating oil slick barriers at the mouths of all slough and creek channel inlets along the County's shoreline areas, in the event of an oil or other hazardous material spill. T V MORRISON &. FOERSTER SAN FRANCISCO ATTORNEYS AT LAW NEW YORK LOS ANGELES WASHINGTON, D.C. SACRAMENTO PLEASE RESPOND TO: DENVER ORANGE COUNTY P. O. BOX 8130 LONDON PALO ALTO WALNUT CREEK, CA 945%-8130 BRUSSELS SEATTLE HONG KONG 101 YGNACIO VALLEY ROAD, SUITE 450 TOKYO WALNUT CREEK, CA 945964095 TELEPHONE (510)295-3300 DIRECT DIAL NUMBER TELEFACSIMILE (510)946-9912 April 29 , 1993 ( 510 ) 295-3319 RECEIVED The Honorable Tom Torlakson, Chair and Members of the Contra Costa County APR 2 91J�3 Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez , CA 94553 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. Re: Byron 78 General Plan Amendment Dear Tom: On behalf of our client, the Byron 78 partnership ( "Byron 78" ) , we are writing to request your favorable consideration of Byron 78 's request for a general plan amendment covering its 78-acre site in East Contra Costa County (the "Project Site" ) . The GPA would redesignate 33 acres of the Project Site (currently designated as. "Agricultural Lands" ) for "Commercial" and "Office/Professional" uses. The remaining 45 acres of the Project Site would retain an agricultural designation. The Project Site is located at the northeast corner of Bixler Road and State Route 4 in the Discovery Bay area. The following is a brief history of the Project's evolution over the last six years: . I. PROJECT EVOLUTION • A Project to Meet Community Needs: From RV/Boat Storage to a Shopping Center In 1986 , Byron 78 proposed to construct a boat storage facility on the Project Site to serve the recreational interests of the Discovery Bay community. This proposal would have required a general plan amendment from "Agricultural Lands" to "Light Industrial. " In 1987 , an environmental impact report ( "EIR") was prepared for the boat storage facility and circulated for public review and comment. MORRISON fit, FOERSTER April 29 , 1993 Page Two In response to a community request for a shopping center on the Project Site, Byron 78 revised its project to include a three-anchor shopping center, full service gas station, office/professional uses and light industrial and RV/boat storage facilities . During 1989 and 1990 , Byron 78 worked on the modifications to its project with input from the Discovery Bay community. A color rendering of the commercial portion of the project is enclosed. • Elimination of Light Industrial Land Uses from Project Site During 1990 , a second draft EIR was prepared to evaluate Byron 78 's new project. The draft EIR was circulated in September 1991 for public review and comment. In response to a letter from the Department of Fish & Game submitted on the draft EIR, Byron 78 prepared a wetlands delineation, which indicated the presence of jurisdictional wetlands covering approximately 32 acres of the Project site. In response to the wetlands study, Byron 78 dramatically scaled down its plans to avoid impacts on most of the wetlands on the Project Site. Byron 78 's revised plans ( i ) eliminated all proposed light industrial uses from the Project Site and ( ii ) reduced in half the size of Byron 78's proposed shopping center. Approximately 45 acres of the Project Site will be retained as Agricultural Lands and available for wetlands mitigation. A wetlands mitigation plan is being developed for submission to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and EPA. Discussions with those agencies , and with the staff of the Board's Water Committee, have been very positive. A conceptual draft wetlands mitigation plan prepared by LSA Associates , Inc. , is enclosed. II . RECOMMENDATION FOR PROJECT APPROVAL Planning commission Recommendation On March 1 , 1993 , the East County Regional Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the GPA. MORRISON & FOERSTER April 29 , 1993 Page Three Compliance with the 65/35 Land Use Policy The Project Site is inside the County's Urban Limit Line. Approval of the GPA would further the County's 65/35 Land Preservation goals by leaving approximately 45 acres of the total 78 acre site as "Agricultural Lands. " • Byron 78 Commitment to Project Byron 78 's investment in the process and in this Project has been considerable over the last six years . Byron 78 's commitment to this project, and to serving the expressed needs of the current and future residents in the Discovery Hay. area , is indisputable. We would appreciate your approval of this project. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 4�� &JYI(4 Karen Bowers Policy Analyst cc: Anthony J. Ujdur Discovery Bay Municipal Advisory Committee David A. Gold, Esq. KB:abm Enclosure W90644 11 11 V:l.St�3. II o is II iii II II II II jj 11 jj g II II jj ,. II i \ II \ II t E F1 CD r„ CD 1 II II 1 jj II o II jl � II jl II jj II jl II II r - jj II II 11 Co ------------------- - 1 11 Ji e �` L,,' 'r "R` 9th ^ y•.. • ' ��y-+rte^' t, �y i. „^�,+�•. \' a �. mea)p.N r;� �=' 111.•t�."'; � +'�,1, V •� ' �� •.. �� t•�_ is s ACr+. , •n, T ! 4 1 �IjIIIq,7{�Fj/�,.'p, •w 1.� i. ti>. �o dp ,� f