The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 04231996 - D.9 D. 9 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on---ApdL 23, 1996 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Smith NOES: Supervisor Bishop ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Hearing On Administrative Appeal of Charles M. Koss, et al, Regarding the Issuance of a Grading Permit for Subdivision 7462 , Black Oak Estates, Diablo Area. On April 16, 1996, the Board of Supervisors continued to this date the hearing on the Administrative Appeal of Charles M. Koss, et al, regarding the issuance of a grading permit for Subdivision 7462, Black Oak Estates, Diablo area. Dennis Barry, Community Development Department, commented on the request by the Board to staff to meet with the property owners and the developer, advising that the meeting had been held and that there was no general consensus reached at the meeting. Supervisor Bishop advised that she had been at the meeting last week to try to resolve the outstanding issues and she commented on the discussion at the meeting, including grading and trees . Supervisor Bishop also commented on a letter from Leah Weinger dated April 19, 1996, setting forth the results of the meeting and continuing concerns . The following persons appeared and gave testimony: Richard Carlston, 1331 N. California Boulevard, #700 . Walnut Creek, representing Black Oak Estates spoke in opposition to the appeal ; Hal Seibert, no address given, spoke on the issue of the prematurity of the grading permit; Leah R. Weinger, P.O. Box 792 , Diablo, spoke on issues including deeded access, ownership of the property and suspension of the grading permit; Amara Koss, 2480 Mt . Diablo Scenic Boulevard, Diablo, ; Rich Gorman, 5000 Executive Parkway, #125, San Ramon; Nancy Seibert, 2421 Mt . Diablo Scenic Boulevard, Diablo; Charles Koss, 2480 Mt . Diablo Scenic Boulevard, Diablo; Nelda Matheny, 1257 Quarry Lane #110, Pleasanton, representing HortScience, Inc . ; Dennis Coleman,. 2345 Mt . Diablo Scenic Boulevard, Diablo; Mike Bedker, 111 Deerwood Place, San Ramon. Following discussion of. the matter the Board of Supervisors took the following action: CONTINUED to May 7, 1996, at 4 P.M. , the hearing on the Administrative Appeal of Charles M. Koss, et al, regarding the issuance of a grading permit for Subdivision 7462, Black Oak Estates, Diablo area. CC: Community Development I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the County Counsel Board of Su isors o the date shown. ATTESTED: PHIL BATICKI 1, Clerk of the Board pervis nd Count A inistrator a By Deputy \ I APR 2 2 1996 SUPERVISOR SMITH April 19, 1996 VIA FAX AND U. S. MAIL (510) 646-1396 Chair Jeff Smith Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County County Administration Building 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Appeal of Grading Permit Subdivision Application No. 7462 - Black Oak Estates Dear Chair Smith: We wish to take this opportunity to thank you, and the rest of the Board, for your attention to the above-referenced matter which appeared on your agenda for Tuesday, April 16th. You will recall that the appeal, while raised in conjunction with the Black Oak Estates subdivision in particular, raises broader policy issues for the Board' s consideration. That broader policy issue is, of course, whether a grading permit ought to be issued to a developer or property owner prior to the approval of a final map by the Board of Supervisors. Apparently, the majority of the Board was as astonished to learn of the County' s policy permitting the issuance of a grading permit in advance of approval of the final map as were the homeowners bringing the appeal before you. Of equally great concern to these homeowners is the other issue discussed at the hearing on Tuesday, that being another County staff policy to issue a grading permit without proof of consent of adjoining property owners in the event the work requires entry onto adjacent private property. You will recall that County Counsel strongly advised that the grading ordinance did not require such proof of consent by adjoining property owners . County Counsel must stand corrected, however, since Section 716-4 . 1419 of the County Ordinance Code states, in pertinent part, that "whenever any portion of the work requires entry onto adjacent property for any reason the permit applicant shall obtain the written consent of the adjacent property owners . . . and shall file a copy of the consent with the building official before a permit for such work may be issued. " Title 7, of course, governs the issuance of grading permits . Title 7 also requires compliance with Title 9 requirements when a tentative map is filed. (Section 716-4 . 202 (d) . ) Title 9 additionally requires written evidence in the form of rights of entry or r Jeff Smith April 19, 1996 Page 2 easements across private property for the performance of necessary construction work. No such consent has been granted by any of the property owners along Mt . Diablo Scenic Blvd. As you are also aware, the appellants have contested, and will continue to contest, that Black Oak Estates has any ownership interest or granted rights in the road. Because the Board of Supervisors has not yet approved the final map (and, thus, Condition 36L, which requires sufficient proof of legal access) , the appellants assert that BOE has been accessing its property without the consent of property owners in violation of the County Ordinance Code Sections 716-4 . 1419 and 94-4 .412 . During the hearing last week, County Counsel erroneously opined that the County may not suspend a grading permit . Ordinance Code Section 716-4 . 1430 provides that a permit may either be suspended or revoked. Additionally, Section 4 . 1432 authorizes a stop work, order. Further, no grading permit has posted anywhere on the site in violation of Section 716-4 . 1422 . Testimony was also received by the Board on Tuesday from Deputy County Sheriff Dean Kimball regarding the hazardous operation of construction vehicles (excessive speeds, crossing the centerline of the roadway and encroachment onto private property) in violation of Section 716- 4 . 1.430 (4) and Conditions of Approval No. 33 . Finally, Condition 36F to the tentative map requires the applicant to "optimize the preservation of trees along Mount Diablo Scenic Blvd. " Today, one tree remains standing beside Mt . Diablo Scenic Blvd. as the rest have been eliminated by BOE; most were destroyed on April 17, 1996 , following the hearing. For all of the foregoing reasons, the appellants once again respectfully request that the Board of Supervisors suspend Black Oak Estates' grading permit until such time the Board either approves or disapproves the applicant' s final map. Very tru yours, kWEINGER f Koss Charles A. Koss Rob Weinger Leah R. Weinger 01OR RECEIVED COUNTY COUNSEL'S OFFICE APR 2 3 1996 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AP MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA CLERV,B ARA Or CO STq CO.SUPEFMSOBS Date: April 22, 1996 To: Board of Supervisors Attn: From: Victor J. Westman, County Counsel By: David F. Schmidt, Deputy County Counsel G Re: Appeal of Kosses and Weingers of Issuance of Grading Permit Black Oak Estates Subdivision (Mt. Diablo Scenic Blvd. ) As we advised at the April 16 Board meeting, the above-described appeal challenges the issuance of a grading permit for Black Oak Estates. However, the appellants have not cited any provision of the grading ordinance (Division 716) that has been violated. The appellants have cited, condition of approval 36.L, which requires the subdivider to furnish sufficient evidence of access to the subdivision. However, condition 36.L is not a prerequisite to obtaining a grading permit and is only relevant to the approval of' a final map. For that reason, the appellants' reliance on condition 36.L is misplaced, and they have cited no ordinance violation that would justify non-issuance of the grading permit. At the April 16 meeting, we were requested by Supervisor Bishop to furnish a list of the materials we reviewed before preparing our 6-27- 95 memo, in which we concluded that the subdivider had furnished sufficient evidence of access to the subdivision from Diablo Road (i.e. , by way of Mt. Diablo Scenic Boulevard) . Our review included the following materials: 1. Findings and conditions of approval for rezoning file #2884-RZ, final development plan 3004-90 and vesting tentative subdivision map 7462 (Black Oak Estates) , including 11-24-92 and 12-3-92 Board orders and Ordinance No. 92-94 dated 12-8-92 . 2 . Various correspondence and legal arguments from the appellants, including letter dated 2-14-95 and various exhibits. 3. Memo from Public Works Department dated 12-20-94, including attached deeds, maps and other documents. 4. Memo from Public Works Department dated 2-6-95, including 1-13-95 letter from Old Republic Title Co. and attached deeds, maps and other documents. w 5. Memo from Public Works Department dated 2-14-95, including 2-14-95 letter from Old Republic Title Co. 6. Memo from Public Works Department dated 2-27-95, including 2-14-95 letter from Old Republic Title Co. , 2-14-95 letter from the appellants and various exhibits. 7. Memo from subdivider dated 3-17-95, including 3-7-95 letter from Old Republic Title Co. and other attachments. 8. Our 3-22-95 memo to Public Works Department. 9. Letter dated 5-26-95 from the subdivider's counsel, including amendment to title insurance policy, which insures the right of access over Mt. Diablo Scenic Boulevard. 10. Legal texts and treatises. In addition to reviewing and considering the above-fisted materials, we had several discussions with County staff and the appellants: As a result of our review, we concluded that the subdivider had furnished sufficient evidence of legal access to the subdivision from Diablo Road, as set forth in our 6-27-95 memo. DFS/ r` -2- P Request to S eak For ( THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) C nplete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. Ivanw: -70hyl AA • COIM, ffk1 C.- A 67- 0 Address: JrDD b �k-&C(A 4f ii? PeWIXIV;' eo A..+.e-" I am speaking for myself_or O'ganization:A2 lfe-,c Omm of — P-he-td-P CHECK ONE: _. ! wish to speak on Agenda Item #_E. Oat r z3 9. My will be: pnneral for nst I wish to speak on the subject of . . I do not wish to speak but leave these +comments for the Board to consider: