The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 04201999 - D3 " a a - Contra TO: BOi RD OF SUPERVISORS Costa FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP County COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: April 20, 1999 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT STUDY REQUEST FROM PONDEROSA HOMES AND SHAPELL INDUSTRIES OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA (GP x`#99-00021003) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION REM,MENDA_ TSI ,NS Authorize a General Plan Amendment study as requested by Ponderosa Homes and Shapell Industries of Northern California for an approximately 596 acre site in the Tassajara area, and DIRECT that the requests be consolidated with the Braddock and Logan General Plan study authorization as one General Plan Amendment study authorization for the Tassajara Valley area. FISCAL IMPACI All staff' costs are paid by fees charged to project applicants. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE p`:F . w.. RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE - APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES : '/ d. ACTION OF BOARD ON April 2 P, 19 9 c APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED _OTHER Lx SFE THE ATTACHED ADDENDUM FOR HOARD ACTION AND VOTE TE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE _. UN IMOUS (ABSENT AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ABSENT: ABSTAIN: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Catherine uris (925)335-1210 ATTESTED2o , , 9 9 ccs Community v pment Department (CDD) PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK. OF County C nsel THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Public arks-Heathe allenger AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Po erosa Homes spell sof Northern Califor ° C BY � , DEPUTY df bo3:gp990001.bo Page Two B OIREASONS-EM QQM.EDATIOlB Ponderosa Homes has requested a General Plan Amendment study be authorized for an approximately 16 acre site located on the south side of Camino Tassajara across from the Blackhawk East Gate. The site is designated "Agricultural Lands" in the County General Plan, Ponderosa Homes is requesting the land use designation be changed to "Single Family Residential - Nigh Density" for 15 acres of the site, with the remaining one acre proposed for the "Open Space" land use designation as shown on Map B. These proposed designations would allow for a range of 57 to 82 units. Shapell Industries of Northern California has requested a General Plan Amendment study be authorized for an approximately 580 acre site located on the south side of Camino Tassajara on properties to the west, east and south of the Ponderosa Homes request. The project site includes eastern portion of the Wendt Ranch project site (91 acres), which has general Plan land use designations of Single Family Residential - Nigh density, Multiple Family Residential - Low Density and Open Space. The remaining 489 acres has a current General Plan land use designation of"Agricultural Lands" Shapell Industries is proposing the land use designation for the site be amended to allow for the following land use designations as shown on flap C: Open Space 337 acres Single Family Residential - Low Density 65 acres Single Family Residential - Medium Density 158 acres Multiple Family residential - Low Density 20 acres These land use designations would allow for a range of between 521 and 912 lots. The General Plan Amendment study, when completed, will be scheduled for hearing before the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission for recommendation and the Board of Supervisors for decision. Authorization of the General Plan Amendment study does not imply support for the requested change. yyy��t4 ' 1� s i 8Q� �Ao *9000 i t it s { f , , � L f IF -* . �4 f Ow- t ,119M NEM • pmmit � s t � tt• -t :r� t HOWN Abill AIN f * 3 `*. ;4 rpt ► owl fall pro ,r � • M � s • r r 1,37M 1 SI + s t�GYtNG}y Z m ri Y oe �i BOARD o€:Dtin?(—r)Rs '� .Y vt$, tach Cowan P EOPLE F O R OPEN S PAC E Andrew Butler _ CD Andrew Nash Paul Okamoto - Vire PresidentsN David Azevedt7 April , 1999 Serrelmy-TreasurerLynn Bagley Sob Berman Catherine Kutsuris - -� David Bomberger Roberta Brgaeo Community Development Department - T Don DicketxsottContra Costa County ' Volker Eisele George Ellman 651 Pine Street Robert Hambrecht /v ��€ Margaret Hand Martinez, CA 94553 Robert V.Hawn. Booker Holton Bnd Johns Regarding proposed General Plan Amendment Study for Alamo geek Robert E.Johnson Vivian Fahr. T.J.xent,;r' Dear Ms. Kutsuri : Zoe Kersteen-Ttackcr Trish Mulvey Annette Rose Cindy Rribin The proposed General Plan Amendment Study for the Alamo Creek Margaret Spaulding Ellen Straus project in the Tassajara Valley is clearly premature. Dee Swanhuyser Laney Thornton George D.Tnev Michelle Yesrev For over a year, Contra Costa County has been debating the future of Betsy York Tassajara Valley. Although much still needs to be resolved, the Board Gat.recU€�tv�.I3;Rr:c€�oet Liininennan i? of Supervisors has been clear in establishing two policies to ensure Bala sayer that Tassajara is not lost to piecemeal development and that, instead, AtwisoRvlana term Consequences are considered: Howard Alien Robert Hugsrurge r Leslie.S.Ayers 1 The "Disinclination"Policy. In light of overwhelming lBlake ;ose ph Bodoviv community opposition to Tassajara Valley development, the Board ose Lewis H.Butler of Supervisors expressed its "intent not to authorize General Plan Yatrici=t Compton t,ois Crozier-Hogle Amendment studies in the Tassajara area until further Mrs.Ralph Y.Davies determination," (September 22, 1993). Laurence Dawson Rene di Rosa Barbara Eastman it Done 2. Equal Urban Limit Line Review. an January 26, 1999, the 3a Erskine Ch'itiirtm D.Evers guard took a step towards moving the Urban Limit Line to better Mort Fie.Grocker direct development in the Count Impacts of a new line will be �:ilccn R.Growaacl p y' p :^�icrc.d Heiler carefully assessed under California Environmental Quality Act 1.Michael Hey=t:aF, J (CEQA) review. The final location of the Urban Limit Line in oseph C.Houghteling :Ilan Jacobs Tassajara Valley is yet to be determined. But the Board voted to Huey Joixtson Robert Kirkwood study two alternatives, the "Watershed Line" and the "Sphere of Melvin B.Lane Ted L.empert Influence Line" equally. A General Plan Amendment study for Lawyer.e Liv ngs" Alamo Creek renders consideration inherently unequal and iawrence Livingst<7n,Jr. ai,xcla i.loyci undermines CEQA review. Bob Mang Sylvia McLaughlin Bonnie Mitsui i neodore Osmundson Veal R.Peirce George A.Sears MAIN OFFICE a 530 Bush Street Suite 303,San Francisco CA 94108 a (415) 398-3730 Mrs.WiMam Siri Mariorie Stern SOUTH BAY OFFICE+ 1922 The Alameda Suite 213, San Jose CA 95126 ♦ (408)983-0539 Hoax.John Sutter NORTH BAY OFFICE ♦520 Mendocino Avenue Suite 225, Santa Rosa CA 95401 ♦(707) 575-3661 Mrs.Otto Teller terry Ione FAST BAY OFFICE♦ 1172 North Main Street Suite 203, Walnut Creek CA 94596 •(510)932-7776 8 10W., Authorization of the Alamo Creek General Plan Amendment study therefore contradicts County direction and policy as established in recent public hearings. Board hearings, however, are not the only forum for discussing growth in Contra Costa County. Other efforts are underway. Members of the Board of Supervisors, for example, have called for local moratoria, subregional planning, and smart growth summits. Businesses, labor leaders, and environmental groups are working to establish common ground on issues of land use and transportation. Cities are working with one another and with the County to coordinate planning efforts. These encouraging conversations, however, would ring hollow if the County were to consider Tassa#ara development at the same time. Such a decision deserves due deliberation and public scrutiny. I understand that the issue has been considered for the Consent Calendar on April 20, 1999. At the very least, the issue should be a discussion item. And, for the reasons stated above, the proposal should be denied. Thank you. Sincerely, Tom Mooers East Say Field Director cc: Supervisor ,toe Canciamilla Supervisor Mark DeSaulnier Supervisor Donna Gerber Supervisor John Gioia Supervisor Gayle B. Uilkema ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ ADDENDUM TO ITEM D. April 20, 1999 Agenda On this date,the Board of Supervisors heard the requests for a General Plan Amendment study from Ponderosa Homes and Shapell Industries of Northern California (GP 99-0002/003). Dennis Barry, Community Development Department Director,was present for the meeting. Catherine Kutsuris, Community Development Department-Deputy Director/Current Planning, presented the staff report. She noted that in December 1998, the Board authorized the Braddock and Logan General Plan Amendment study in the same general area, however, elected to hold the active review of that study because of these anticipated requests in the same proximity. The Ponderosa Homes study area, a 16 acre site across from the East gate of the Blackhawk Community, would change from agriculture land to single family high density, which would allow for 57 to 82 units. Ms. Kutsuris advised that the second proposal,that of Shapell Industries of Northern California,was for approximately 580 acres for a number of General Plan designations, including open space, single family residences (low density and medium density), and multiple family low density. The request would equate to between 521 and 912 lots. The total of the Braddock and Logan, Shapell, and Ponderosa requests if authorized for a General Plan Amendment study, would be for approximately 913 to 1542 residential units in those areas. Public comment was opened, and the following speakers offered testimony; Bridgett O'Connor, 1010 Dunhill Court, Danville; Marcus O'Connell, 3206 Esperanza, Concord; Melanie Nutter, Greenbelt Alliance, 1372 N. Main Street, Walnut Creek; Millie Greenberg, Town of Danville, 674 Sheri Lane, Danville; Toth Koch, Applicant, Shapell Industries, 6100 N. Milpitas Blvd., Milpitas; Robert Duchi, d/c Associates, Inc., 1440 Marie Lane, Walnut Creek; Seth Adams, Save Mount Diablo, 1196 Boulevard Way, #10, Walnut Creek; David?Nesmith, Sierra Club, 2530 San Pablo Avenue, Berkeley; Kathleen Nimr, Green Party,2204 Olympic Drive, Martinez; Pamela Haroy, Ponderosa Homes, 6671 Owens Drive, Pleasanton; Gayle Bishop, 2800 Finley Road, Pleasanton. Those desiring to spear having been heard,the Board discussed the matter. Following the Board's discussion, Supervisor Gerber moved that the General Plan Amendment study be postponed until after the Urban Limit Line review was completed, and the Board reached a conclusion about the Urban Limit Line. Further, she suggested that with regard to matters in the Tassajara Valley,both the County Planning Commission and the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning Commission would meet Jointly, in San Ramon, for public convenience. The motion died for lacy of a second. Discussion.continued. Supervisor DeSaulnier moved that the Board proceed with the study, and put special emphasis on the request from Danville(even though that is normal procedure); accept staff s recommendations; request that the Planning Commission re- hear the discussion, that staff make a recommendation about the appropriate hearing body using,the previous guidelines, and the project be re-noticed publicly. Supervisor Gioia suggested an amendment to the motion,that the Board declare their intent not to accept any General Plan Amendment requests for the area outside the watershed boundary. 1 Dennis Barry suggested that the Board declare their intent to further deny study authorizations rather than not accepting applications, as a matter of due process. Supervisor DeSaulnier agreed withMr. Barry's suggestion as an amendment to the motion, as dict Supervisor Gioia who had seconded the motion. The Board continued their discussion. Supervisor Gerber requested Supervisor DeSaulnier restate the intent of his motion. Supervisor DeSaulnier responded that it was his intent to have staff come for a recommendation as to where and who would be the appropriate body or bodies to be involved in any of this process. He further advised that he would request another public hearing, so there would be another opportunity for public comment. Following farther discussion by the Board,Dennis Barry suggested that the two items, the consideration of the Planning Commission and the intent to decline further General Plan Amendment studies be on the agenda for the next meeting, since they are not on today's agenda. Supervisor Canciamilla stated that he would be dis-inclined to support an effort to consolidate the two matters. Supervisor DeSaulnier amended his motion to include staff's recommendations,with added direction that the two items come back to the Board. Supervisor Canciamilla requested that Supervisor DeSaulnier withdraw his motion and restate it for clarification. Supervisor DeSaulnier withdrew his motion. He restated the motion to include staff s recommendations and directed staff to come back to the Board on a future date regarding the Planning Commission issue and a subsequent report regarding dis-inclination of future applications. Supervisor Gioia seconded the motion. Supervisor Gerber stated that she would not be in support of the motion, and noted that the previously proposed Urban Limit Line changes are being studied equally. The vote on the motion was as follows. AYES: SUPERVISORS GIOIA,UILKEMA,DeSAULNIER and CANCIAMILLA NOES: SUPERVISOR.GERBER ABSENT. NONE ABSTAIN: NONE 2 April 19, 1999 ` �ECEE 4 . !MolJoe Canciamilla Chairman, Board of Supervisors m,_J County of Contra Costa CQNTA' i� 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Re: General Plan Amendment Study - Ponderosa Homes and Shapell Industries of Northern California (GP#99.0002/003) Dear Supervisor Canciamilla: On April 20, 1999,the Board of Supervisors will be considering requests from Ponderosa Homes and Shapell Industries of Northern California to initiate a General Plan Amendment(GPA) Study for a 600- /- acre grouping of properties in the Tassajara Area. The subject properties adjoin the eastern edge of the sphere of influence for the Town of Danville. In July of last year, the Berard declared its intent not to authorize GPA Studies in the Tassajara Area pending a determination by the Board of what planning initiative(s) would be pursued for the Tassajara Area. The merits of that action(i.e.,deciding not to accept any new property-specific CPA Studies while the framework of a broader, more inclusive planning initiative was determined)apply all the snore now that a County-wide review of the urban limit line(TILL)has been initiated. Moving forward with property-specific GPA Studies would be premature since,using language from an earlier draft Board Resolution, "Such anticipated requests constitute a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare, in that such general plan changes, rezonings, and land-use entitlements would lead to a degradation of the agricultural character of the Tassjara.area."(Excerpt from draft Board Resolution prepared for staff report on Interim Ordinance for the Tassajara Area- Moratorium, dated July 14, 1998.) There is a very real possibility that in authorizing the CPA Study, the County may be presupposing the outcome of the 6LL relocation review. The bulk of the lands involved in the GPA Study request lie beyond one of the two possible new boundaries for a relocated Tassajara Area Un. It is difficult to imagine how the GPA Study and this aspect of the ULL relocation review could occur simultaneously. It would appear more logical to resolve the ULL relocation issues first(inclusive of the preparation of a comprehensive BIR document), then undertake the review of property-specific GPA Studies that are reflective of the ultimate location ofthe ULL for the Tassajara Area. Choosing to allow the reviews to occur simultaneously would be confusing at best, would require concurrent preparation of costly,overlapping environmental documentation,and would likely preclude the ability to assure that adequate transition between urban development and agricultural lands will be provided. 510 La Gonda way • Danville,California 94526-1740 (925)314-3300 fv To reiterate, the Town believes consideration of prtoperty-specific CPA Studies is premature. However, if the Board decides to allow the GPA Study to move ahead despite these concerns, the Town would recommend that the following areas are addressed: A single CPA Study should address not only the Ponderosa and Shapell properties but all the Intervening Properties as well. Allowing separate GPA Studies would defeat the goal of comprehensive planning. ® The need for public facilities, particularly schools and parks. It is critical that, at a minimum, all remaining lands necessary for a combination middle school J community park are secured through the GPA Study process. The potential development in the context of the already approved Meadows and Wendt Ranch subdivisions. Specific issues that should be examined include internal circulation, drainage and other infrastructure needs. The Town's General Plan calls for a"coordinated approach to planning and development review in the San Ramon 'Valley" and states that "Future land use changes in the Tassajara and Daugherty Valley Area should be directly linked to a rational growth management plan which establishes acceptable levels of service for all infrastructure and public services." The Town's principal concern, should the Board decide to consider these requests, is that any new proposed development in this area must be directly linked to appropriate levels of service for all infrastructure and public services. These principles were the basis ofthe Dougherty'Valley Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement outlines basic principles to ensure that: municipal services provided for new development in the Dougherty Valley and Tassajara Area are at similar levels to those provided in adjacent incorporated jurisdictions, agreed-upon performance standards and traffic service objectives are monitored and achieved, and ifperformance standards and traffic service objectives are not achieved.,development is halted until any deficiencies are remedied. Thank you for your attention to the Town of Danville's concerns with the proposed General Plan Study for the Ponderosa and Shapell properties. Should the GPA Study move forward, the Town will continue to work with the County in addressing the concerns of our residents. Sincerely, TOWN A, YILO ?v e 'el rich Mayor c: Board of Supervisors Dennis Barry Catherine Kutsuris Ponderosa Homes Shapell of Northern California