Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06221993 - IO.2 l TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1.0.-2 ­-SE L Contra FROM: INTERNAL OPERATIONS COMMITTEE Costa County June 14 1993 DATE: cOivtt SUBJECT: REPORT ON RANCHETTE PARCELIZATION PATTERNS SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: 1 . ACKNOWLEDGE that the Agricultural Core rezoning is in progress and will come forward to the Board of Supervisors in a timely fashion. 2 . ACKNOWLEDGE the Agricultural Task Force' s efforts that are underway and forward the Task Force products directly to the Internal Operations Committee for review prior to follow-up action by the Planning Commission or the Board of Supervisors, so that work can be prioritized. 3 . REQUEST that the Community Development Director initiate rezoning of all major publicly held lands to A-80 . This should be accomplished as staff time and resources become available. This request should not be considered a priority item. 4 . RETAIN on referral to the Internal Operations Committee the issue of other rezoning actions which the Board of Supervisors may wish to initiate until additional studies are completed by the Community Development Department staff. In this regard, DIRECT the Community Development Director to prepare and forward to the Internal Operations Committee on July 26, 1993 a report which identifies the number, type and location of all. applications for minor subdivisions and rezonings outside the Urban Limit Line which have been received since January 1, 1991 . CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMM TEE APPROVE r - OTHER SIGNATURES ACTION OF BOARD ON June 22, 1993 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. ATTESTED y�3 Contact:County Administrator PHIL BATC16tOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF cc: Community Development Director SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel Public Works BY �• DEPUTY I .O.-2 5 . DETERMINE that the County Planning Commission should be the hearing body for rezoning actions which flow from this countywide review of open space zoning practices . BACKGROUND: On December 22, 1992, Supervisor Torlakson brought a report to the Board of Supervisors dealing with interpretation of the agricultural land use policies in the County General Plan and its intent with respect to those policies and timetable for action (copy attached.) . Minor wording changes were made by the Board of Supervisors and an item on Ranchette Parcelization Patterns was also referred to the Internal Operations Committee for report. This report responds to the issues raised in that report. * Agricultural Core Rezonings Staff has been working on preparation of the notification lists and rezoning findings so that this item can come to public hearing before the County Planning Commission. This item was scheduled for hearing on June 8, 1993 . The Commission continued the matter until its August 3, 1993 meeting. * Report on Agricultural Preservation Programs The Board of Supervisors has charged the Agricultural Task Force with investigating a range of issues dealing with agricultural preservation within the County. On March 9, 1993, the Board of Supervisors extended the sunset provision for this committee until December, 1993. The charge to this committee is shown on Attachment_ `B. Upon action by the Agricultural Task Force, the Community Development Department will be in a position to offer its suggestions in support of or offer options to the Task Force' s recommendations . The Contra Costa County-East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee discussed the issue of large lot sizes and the creation of agricultural preservation areas at its April 8, 1993 meeting. The East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD) indicated that since it serves both Alameda and Contra Costa counties, it is harder to justify major acquisitions in Contra Costa County since their Measure AA bond issue encourages projects which protect open space and Alameda County zoning is more compatible with this approach. EBRPD also endorsed the formation of additional agricultural preservation areas . The EBRPD also urged, at a minimum, the rezoning of the large publicly owned watershed and parklands to A-80 . This was an informational discussion and the committee took no actions on this issues . * Large Lot Rezoning Supervisor Torlakson' s memo of 'December 22, 1992 directed that no further action on large lot rezoning be taken "at that time" and referred the matter of large lot rezoning to the Internal Operations Committee. At the same time, our Committee notes that there is another adopted policy by the Board of Supervisors which indicates that we should look at large lot rezoning, taking into account slope density and other factors . Our Committee feels that staff should be directed to proceed with efforts to rezone the major publicly held lands to A-80 . This should include regional parks, East Bay Municipal Utility District and Contra Costa Water District watershed lands, State parks, the Concord Naval Weapons Station, deed restricted private lands, and other extensive public land holdings . It could also include small private holdings which are needed to create a logical rezoning policy. Given staff resource limitations, this should not be considered a high priority request. -2- I .O.-2 Our Committee is also interested in reviewing other possible agricultural rezoning programs, including clustering development on four one acre pieces of a forty acre parcel, with development rights on the remaining 36 acres permanently dedicated to the County in order to preserve viable agricultural property. We have, therefore requested information on the location and nature of requests for minor subdivisions and rezoning applications outside the Urban Limit Line since the effective date of Measure C - January 1, 1991 . * County Planning Commission as Hearing Body The County Planning Commission should be the designated hearing body for rezoning programs that are accomplished as part of this countywide review of open space rezoning practices . i -3- ATTACHMIM "A" TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Contra FROM: 3- Costa Supervisor Tom Torlakson Count DATE: December 22, 1992 . Y SUBJECT: Consider direction by the Board on its interpretation of the agricultural land use policies in the County General Plan, its intent with respect to these policies and timetable for action. SPECIFIC REOUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)i BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: The Board makes the following determinations and takes the following actions: - (1) That there are no policies in the General Plan which contemplate or require rezoning of land outside the Urban Limit Line that is designated Agricultural Lands (the only such rezoning policy refers to Agricultural Core designated lands) . that, in fact, the five-acre minimum parcel size is included as part of the General Plan (see Policy 8-w on Page 8-43 and the definition of Agricultural Lands on Page 3-37) . To clarify any previous recommendations from the Board, no rezoning to larger minimum lot sizes for Agricultural Lands outside the ULL is required to appropriate.k The hillside, wetland and agricultural resources and ranchettes policies and existing zoning classifications provide adequate protection for those lands under the General Plan without such rezoning. (2) That the Community Development Department be directed to initiate the rezoning of the Agricultural Core to forty-acre minimum parcel size, and that a rezoning ordinance to that effect be presented to the Board for consideration by the end of *p244 :9 , (3) That the Community Development Department prepare a staff report with options that will provide a basis for the Board to give directions to initiate the adoption of specific ordinances or programs to protect agricultural resources and promote agricultural business, such as an agricultural !&ado-trtML program, transfer or purchase of development rights program, clustering and agricultural conservation easements. That report CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIONATUREISI: ACTION OF BOARD ON Tlcromhar 79 1 1999 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER_X Mark Armstrong, representing East County Farmers; Martin Vitz, Advanced Planning Manager for East Bay Regional Parks District, and Frank Pereira, 6040 Alhambra Valley Road, Martinez, spoke. Supervisor Torlakson amended his recommendations as follows: #1 added "at this time" following the asterisk in the 10th line. #2 added "March .31, 1993 or sooner" in place of April 30, 1993 in the last line. #3 added " preserve area" to replace"lands trust" in the 5th line and added "one additional program option to consider is the formation of additional agricultural preserves" to the end of #3. Added Recommendation # 4: REFER to Internal Operations Committee for an update on Ranchette Parcelization Patterns. The Board APPROVED the above recommendations as amended. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS , 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE UNANIMOUS(ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Community Development ATTESTED De-a-a er 22, 199-2 County Counsel PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF County Administrator SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADM)NISTRATOR Internal Operations Committee via Van 513112 (10/89) BYE' `- ,DEPUTY should also include recommendations from the Agricultural Task Force and the East Bay Regional Park District Liaison Committee. A staff report should be available for consideration by the Board by April 30, 1993. Fiscal Impact None. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION: See previous letter to Chair Sunne McPeak dated December 11 1993 and enclosures. Modification to December 8th recommendations are the result of a meeting with County Counsel, Harvey Bragdon and representative ranchers and farmers. County Counsel and Community Development Department have no objections to the recommendations as proposed. The details addressed in prior recommendations (3) ,,1 (4 ) " and (5) will be considered in the course of the development of the staff report in current recommendation (3) . These recommendations a intended to, supersede and update the recommendations in the Board Order adopted March 19, 1991. A'ITACIAfF NT "B„ The following wili be the charges of the Task Force: ° To advise the Board of Supervisors how to implement the 65/35 Land Preservation Plan as it relates to agricultural lands. The Task Force will consider establishing an Agriculture Trust Fund as part of this charge. ° To advise the Board regarding financial support to property owners who wish to keep their lands in agricultural use. ° To advise the Board on appropriate standards for allowing the transfer of the permitted residential density of large agricultural parcels to more appropriate building sites and to allow for the clustering of these residential units. ° To .advise the Board on the development of zoning guidelines for country stores and 'fruit stands and make recommendations on any changes to State laws which govern such operations. ° To advise the Board on the implementation of County General Plan policies related to agriculture. :r i I