HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05022000 - SD3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
- ,ti., Contra
FROM: Michael G.Ross,Director of Animal Services
b: y,ti�r
Costa.
DATE: May 2,2000
County
SUBJECT: Proclaiming the Week of May 7— 13,2000,as
"Be Kind to Animals Week in Contra Costa County."
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
The Director of Animal Services having informed the Board that the first full week of May has
been set as the annual celebration of the national "Be Kind to Animals Week" for observing responsible
pet ownership and kindness to animals, and having requested the Beard to proclaim the week of May 7
-- 13, 2000, as `Be Kind to Animals Week" in Contra Costa County;
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the recommendation of the Director of Animal
Services be APPROVED.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
PROVE OTHER
SIGNATURES :
ACTION OF BOA APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED 9
VOTE:OF SUPERVISORS
1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT
UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE
AYES: NOES: WiNLTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SHOWN.
Orig.Dept: Animal Services Department (6-2935) ATTESTEDy yC -
cc: County Administrator PHIL BA" ELOR,':LERK OF THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
BY Vic " a ..w;DEPiiTY
M382(10188)
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,STATE OF CALIFORNIA
OFFICIAL PROCLAMATION
WHEREAS: We have been endowed not only with the blessings and benefits
of our animal friends who offer us companionship, loyalty and great pleasure in our daily
lives, but also with a firm responsibility to protect these fellow creatures with which we
share the earth from need,pain, fear and suffering; and
WHEREAS: The people in the County of Contra Costa are mindful of the
valuable work done by the Animal Services Department and local humane groups for
their invaluable contribution in caring for last and unwanted animals, instilling humane
values in our children through humane education programs and promoting a true working
spirit of kindness and consideration for animals in the minds and hearts of all people; and
WHEREAS: The County of Contra Costa would like to recognize and honor
the many Animal Services Volunteers who have contributed thousands of fours to pets
and the community; and
WHEREAS: The first full week of May has been set as the annual celebration
of the national week observing responsible pet ownership and kindness to animals:;
NOW,THEREFORE: The members of the Board of Supervisors of the Count=
of Contra Costa do PROCLAIM and PRONOUNCE the week of May h through May
13th as**Be Kind To Animals Week";
PASSED by the Board of Supervisors on May 2, 2000 by unanimous vote of the
Board members present.
w� t
CHAIR, BOARD "UPERVISORS
rjirx/
R EED
JUL 2 4 2000
CL K SgOQLR �V SOAS
0 TA e0
BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PITTSBURG
In the Matter of:
Adoption of a Resolution Requesting the )
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RESOLUTION NO. 00- 9220
To Incorporate Additional:Properties Within the)
County Proposed Urban Limit Line )
The Pittsburg City Council DUES RESOLVE as follows:
BACKGROUND
WHEREAS, Contra Costa County is considering two alternatives to the existing Urban Limit
Line (ULL), The Proposal and The Alternative in the East Contra Costa County area, and
WHEREAS, part of the concerns regarding movement of the ULL are to address the issues of
suburban sprawl and the traffic congestion on State Route 4 in Eastern Contra Costa county,
and
WHEREAS, the City of Pittsburg is likewise concerned with these issues and believe that they
can and will be able to adequately address the issues of suburban sprawl and traffic congestion
on State Route 4 together with the East County Cities, County of Contra Costa, state and
federal governments working in cooperation, and
WHEREAS, the City of Pittsburg is concerned about East-West traffic routes within the City,
such as the Buchanan Bypass and with local circulation to the Pittsburg BART station, San .
Marco Drive and the proposed "Street A" connection to Bailey Road, if developed, will
facilitate completion of the San Marco loop and enhance the circulation system in the southwest
hills, and
WHEREAS, the City of Pittsburg, after the TILL is established as herein referred to, will no
longer have further land to expand as it will be limited by the Delta on the North, the City of
Concord, the Naval Weapons Station Blast Zone, and Bay Point on West and the Antioch City
boundary on the East and the ULL on the South, and
WHEREAS, the City of Pittsburg has planned for many years its master plans for
infrastructure to including water lines and tanks, sewage facilities, parks, reads, and other
facilities to accommodate the planned growth contained in the attached map, and
WHEREAS, an adjustment to the ULL may have some positive effect or provide a time to
allow solutions to suburban sprawl and traffic congestion on State Route 4, and
WHEREAS, growth rate in the last ten (10) in the City of Pittsburg have been slow as
evidenced by the following information:
Year Housing Permits
1993 89
1994 69
1995 105
1996 145
1997 86
1998 245
1999 284
2000 through 5100 168
WHEREAS, the Council believes that having local control over planning issues is in the best
interest of the citizens of Pittsburg, and
WHEREAS, the spirit and effect of cooperation among and between local governments in
jointly addressing the issues of planning, traffic congestion and the ULL is in the public's
interest, and
WHEREAS, it is in the public interest that the cities and the county jointlyaddress the
movement of the ULL,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Pittsburg does hereby recommend
that the county adjust the ULL to reflect an overall reduction in the urban developable area in
the Pittsburg area by adjusting the ULL according to the attached map ("Exhibit A"), which
reflects, a reduction of the ULL in the Pittsburg area and no increase in any area outside the
existing ULL, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City of Pittsburg indicates its intent to adopt the
adjusted line as its own ULL until a general plan study is completed, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the City of Pittsburg indicates its intent to carefully review any
development proposals for San Marco Hills and San Marco Meadows and to undertake appropriate
conditions of approval to reduce traffic and environmental impacts.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of PITTSBURG at a regular
meeting on the l 7th day of July 2000, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAINED:
ABSENT:
Lori G. Anzini, M
ATTEST:
4
Li lien J. Pride, City Clerk
ttIt
rk
• r�. '" *ore/
GP.
'
,
a t
�. y \ ,
,�fvT✓T_
{
v ,
1 4 F• :t �S,
nsr
, v l
t
�� � •�1 '.,. .�. ,_ a _,. � F,t _
i�� f, 5d�0.j5 •.t�i
,
•
City of Pittsburg
Community Development Department
Civic Center,65Civic Avenue,Pittsbur CA 94565
May 30, 2000
Patrick Roche
Contra Costa County
Community Development Department
651 Pine Street
2ndFloor, North Wing
Martinez, California 94553-1250
Dear Mr. Roche:
RE: URBAN LIMIT LINE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT COMMENTS
Thank you for providing the City of Pittsburg with an opportunity to review and comment on the Urban
Limit Line (ULL) Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). Staff reviewed the DEIR and made a
presentation at the regular City Council meeting on May 15, 2000. This letterreflects some of the
deficiencies with the DEIR and the issues and concerns expressed by the City Council members. When
a DEIR is reviewed by an agency, staff evaluates the accuracy of data that is presented in the document.
However, in the case of ULL DEIR, the City of Pittsburg,has numerous concerns. Staff feels that these
concerns are sufficiently serious that the lead agency has to prepare an addendum to evaluate all the
alternatives and circulate the addendum for public comments. The former section of this letter identifies
some of the deficiencies with the DEIR and the latter section sheds light on the Council's concerns.
STAFF COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT DEFICIENCIES:
The entire DEIR operates on the assumption that all the lands impacted by the ULL are within the County.
These lands have County land use designations and no development is possible without a general plan
amendment. The DEIR also emphasizes that the proposed adjustment to the ULL will have no
environmental impacts. By snaking these assumptions, the document has completely disregarded the
adjoining cities and adjoining counties General Plans and their proposed development. The DEIR also
specifies that future development will occur in the County. We would like to bring,to your attention that
the lands that are being removed from the ULL are within the City's planning area and the City has
identified appropriate development for these parcels. In anticipation of future growth, the City has made
proper arrangements to install appropriate infrastructure to serve the proposed developments.
1) The DEIR does not provide enough information for the Board to make a well informed
decision on re-designation of the County proposed Urban Limit Line.
2) The DEIR failed to consider the land use designation identified in the City's existing and
proposed General Plans. The City General Plan identified certain properties within the
planning area appropriate for residential development. Additionally, development of these
Building Division Planning Division Engineering Division
(925) 2524910 (925) 252-4920,Fax 252-4814 (925) 252-4930
properties is considered infill, not urban sprawl.
3) The DEIR failed to evaluate a reasonable range of alternatives as required by CEQA. The
Draft EIR should have evaluated the following alternatives and related impacts:
a), No build alternative
b) Detailed analysis on traffic impacts that will be triggered by urban sprawl
c) Jobs/housing balance
d) City's installation of and ongoing plans for major infrastructure to facilitate the
proposed growth. If the ULL is imposed and no growth is allowed, the City
will have extensive fiscal impacts.
e) A moratorium on urban development in Contra Costa County
f) An alternative to evaluate the environmental impacts without ULL
4) The County land inventory data used in the report is not accurate. Additionally, the document
fails to provide clear analysis on the 35/65 ratio as approved by Measure C.
5) There is no analysis on the impacts of unplanned urban growth that will be triggered by the
introduction of the revised Urban Limit Line.
6) The report fails to explain if there would be any environmental impact if the Board's
alternative was preferred over the Board's proposal.
7) Lands identified for ULL modifications all carry non-urban designations in the County General
Plan. However, these lands are within the City's planning area and the City's General Plan
calls for residential development on some of these properties(page 2, first and second bullets)
8) Absence of indirect impact on physical environment section is very subjective. The consultant
failed to provide adequate information on displacement, economic impacts and urban sprawl
that would be triggered by the proposed policies.
9) The first paragraph of page 7 addresses about the County General Plan and ULL. However,
it fails to shed light on how the ULL was determined in the first place.'
10)Last two paragraphs on page 10 are confusing and fail to explain the intent of the section.
l 1)First paragraph on page 42 is not accurate—there are too many assumptions. For example,
we do not have oak woodlands in this area. Currently there is no impact on residential uses.
However, if the ULL is modified, there will be substantial impacts on residential growth.
12)Paragraph 2 on page 71 is inaccurate. The City is in the process of updating its General Plan
and the proposed General Plan diagram shows development outside the city limits. However,
the Plan does not call for any revisions to the SOI.
13)Information provided on pages 76 and 77 (Table 5) -(5 Pittsburg area and A-2 General
Agriculture, A-4 Agriculture preserve) is inaccurate.
14)Chapter 4 of the DEIR evaluating the environmental effects compared residential and
employment growth rates in Contra Costa County and the adjoining jurisdictions. The analysis
indicated job growth exceeded residential growth in the region and people were commuting
from other counties into Contra Costa County to attend jobs. With the modification to the
ULL, residential growth will be slowed down considerably, resulting in "urban sprawl". This
will result in indirect environmental impacts.
Building Division Planning Division Engineering Division
(925) 252-4910 (925) 252-4920,Fax 252-4814 (925)252-4930
15)The DEIR indicates that LAFCO adheres to County's ULL. This approach restricts the City's
ability to annex developable lands. This action triggers urban sprawl, restricts planned
development and causes an economic burden on local jurisdictions.
16)The City has spent a considerable amount of money in anticipation of development in the South
West Hills. In anticipation of these developments, the City has enhanced the capacity of its
water treatment plant. Additionally, to reduce traffic congestion, the City has identified
appropriate routes to construct major arterials that will have regional significance. If the
proposed ULL is implemented,years of planning will go to waste, causing economic drain on
the City.
17)The DEIR fails to analyze the impacts on properties outside Contra Crista County that adjoin
the county boundary.
CITY COUNCIL'S CONCERNS:
As mentioned earlier, staff made a presentation at the City Council meeting on May 15, 2004. At the
meeting, the City Council expressed that the original ULL that was imposed on the City in 1990 restricted
the City's planned growth. The City.Council considers the proposed ULL adjustment unnecessary, too
restrictive and is like "rubbing salt over wounds". However, if the Board decides to make adjustments to
the existing ULL, they should leave properties adjacent to the proposed developments within the ULL.
Additionally, all properties that have major infrastructure improvements planned for future growth should
be within the ULL. The City Council would like to see the following properties within the ULL:
1) San Marco Hills (West Coast Home Builders)
2) Bailey Estates Residential Development(John Stremel) and
3) Sky Ranch Development(Gordon Gravel)
If you have any further questions or concerns, please call me or Randy Jerome at(925) 252-4924.
Sincerely,
-'
Azitdra K. Gangapuram
Planner
cc: Randy Jerome
Nasser Shirazi
g:k wkick
Building Division Planning Division Engineering Division
(925) 252-4910 (925) 252-4920,Fax 252-4814 (925) 252-4930
_ t
� Jr
4,f a
} +
� r
I 1.
oll
-J" L!
Na.
TLA
IT
vs
O.Ay
�I�ryry 'A f,
a {, L
I
t 1 i.J K..Q
CL
5
i
Y ...
AN1G AREA
' ' a
„��` • �s r ur ' ,k •
Ems++• a-Y-tei-•.-._..-
'"
Ell,
tKe
+y a Y ¢
ti
G
�} k i4 ,� F��`}�, a. c�
$ P t z
kt
i
a�k,
i
4a
a s
�� rg a cicea
c
It f i R
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
Administrative Offices
2020 Railroad Avenue
Pittsburg, California 94565
MEMO: July 17, 2000
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Jeffrey C. Folin, City Manager
RE: STATUS REPORT ON THE POTENTIAL MODIFICATIONS TO
PROPOSED CONTRA COSTA COUNTY'S URBAN LIMIT LINE
BACI�GR.OUND
Beginning in 1998, the County Hoard of Supervisors began discussions through ad hoc
committees regarding agricultural preservation and open space protection, traffic congestion
and growth management. Last year, the Board agreed to an Urban Limit Line (ULL) review
study to amend the County's general plan and undertook various public workshops led by the
supervisors in their districts. Each supervisor then proposed revisions to the ULL and the
County initiated a general plan amendment for potential modifications to the urban limit line
(the "Project") and an EIR was directed to be prepared in November, 1999.
Contra Costa County released for public review the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(DEIR) for General Plan Amendment Stray (GP#99-0001): Potential Modifications to the
Urban Limit Lime, dated April 2000. A public hearing on the adequacy of the DEIR was held
before the County Zoning Administrator in Martinez on May 15, 2000. On June 20, 2000, a
public hearing was held by the Contra Costa County Planning Commission to consider an
amendment to the Contra Costa County General Plan to modify or adjust the Existing Urban
Limit Line. The mandatory 45-day public review period ended on May 30 at which time any
written comments on the completeness and accuracy of the Draft EIR were submitted.
Urban Limit Line - The Urban Limit Line is a County-imposed growth limitation boundary
that is a requirement of Measure "C" which was passed by Contra Costa County voters in
1990. Measure C, entitled the "65!35 Contra Costa County Land Preservation Plan", was
Page 1 of 5
subsequently codified into a County ordinance and restricts urban development within the
county to no more than 35% of the land area; 65% of the land must be preserved for
agricultural, open space, wetlands, parks and other non-urban uses. The actual location of the
ULL was made part of the County's Comprehensive General Plan revision;adopted in 1991.
Voter-imposed provisions of Measure C sunset at the end of 2010. Although the Proposed
changes to the ULL will affect areas throughout the County, the following discussion relates
only to Pittsburg:
Existing ULL Impact on Pittsburg - The present County General Plan ULL in the vicinity of
Pittsburg (within the "Planning Area" of the Pittsburg General Plan) follows the City of
Concord/Naval Weapons Station boundary in the west, crosses Bailey Road, then runs adjacent
through Keller Landfill property to the southern boundary of the City near'Suzanne Drive
where it bends at 45 degree angle to Somersville Road through a portion of Black Diamond
Mines Regional Preserve. The existing ULL is coterminous with the City limit only at the
edge of the residential development south of Buchanan Road west of Railroad Avenue to the
end of Suzanne Drive. Urban expansion of the City -within the ULL- is, therefore, currently
feasible in the Southwest Hills in the west and, in the southeast, in the Suzanne Valley
(Thomas Ranch), Sky Ranch (adjacent to Highlands Ranch), and the hills south of Sky Ranch.
The largest portion within the ULL is Keller Landfill property and is not available for
development. Under the City's current 1488 General Plan, only the Thomas Ranch and Sky
Ranch are designated for residential development within the ULL. However, the proposed
"Montreux." project abutting the City on the west side of Kirker Pass Road';and the Nortonville
Valley, while classified,for residential land use in the City's general plan since 1488, are
outside the County urban limit line. Proposed changes in the General Plan Update eliminates
some former areas of development in the Montreux and Nortonville Valley]areas and also
eliminates any previously indicated residential land use in the Keller Landfill lands; but the
proposed new plan now provides for development opportunities in parts of the remainder of the
Southwest Hills within the current ULL.
Potential Urban Limit Line Modifications in Pittsburg-PPlanning Area - The County proposal as
presented by Supervisor Canciamilla (the "Areas Under Consideration") will move the ULL to
be coterminous with the existing Pittsburg city limits on the south. This shifts 2,882 acres now
within the ULL to outside the line. Specifically, the areas within the Southwest Hills- now
inside the ULL- known as San Marco Hills, Costas (Bailey Estates) and Falria properties would
be removed. These properties are outside the City's sphere of influence (SOI), but within our
general plan Planning Area. Up to 800 upscale homes are envisioned in the proposed General
Plan Update for this area. East of Bailey Road, the entire Keller Canyon Landfill property is
to be moved outside the ULL. As mentioned above, there is no development potential there,
and thus, moving the line will have no impact on Pittsburg's growth potential in that area. In
the east, locating the ULL to the city limits means that the Thomas Ranch and Sky Ranch, with
a total potential of 500 homes, would be moved out of a designated growth i area. The 150 acre
Sky Ranch property is within the City's Stall. The 1524ot Montreux project and Nortonville
Valley area would remain outside the ULL with the County proposal.
Alternate Proposal - An "alternate" proposal has also been considered by the County in the
Pittsburg area. This alternate would leave the 300-acre Bailey Estates and Sky Ranch within
the ULL.
Page 2 of 5
STAFF CORRESPQNDENCE ANI) COMMUNICATION
On May 30, 2000, staff submitted their comments on the Urban Limit Line Draft
Environmental Report to the Contra Costa Community Development Department. In their
response, staff expressed their concerns about the inadequacies of the Draft Environmental
Report. A copy of the letter is attached for your reference.
On June 20, 2000, staff attended the Contra Costa County Planning Commission meeting. As
directed by the City Council, staff spoke in opposition of the proposed general plan amendment
that would shift the existing Urban Limit Line in the Pittsburg area. The proposal to move the
line to the current city limits severely limits the ability of the city to meet its land use and
development goals in accordance with the City's general plan. As it is, the existing urban limit
line was established by the County without consideration to the land use planning and
development strategies outlined in the City of Pittsburg's 1988 General Plan.
Over 10 years ago, the City approached the Local Agency Formation Commission to
informally apprise its members of Pittsburg's future annexation goals and expectations.
Pittsburg's growth is physically limited to the north by the river and Bay Paint, to the west by
the city of Concord and to the east by the city of Antioch. The only development potential is
within selected areas of its southern hills west of Bailey Road and east of the Feller Canyon
Landfill beyond the present city limits. These areas lie in Pittsburg's watershed and are a
visual back drop to the City. They are also adjacent to City infrastructure services and in close
proximity to the Pittsburg/Bay Point BART station and recent and planned improvements to
State Route 4.
The urban limit line is a planning tool that should only affect those areas where the County has
a clear interest. Growth patterns of Cities within the County should be retained for local land
use control as defined in their own general plan planning areas and within the context of sound
regional planning.
Staff requested that any adjustments to the urban limit line only be made to reflect the City's
General Plan Land Use Element. Such adjustments can be made to be consistent both with the
City's future planning goals and the 65/35 provisions of Measure C.
COUNTY ACTION
On June 20, 2000, Contra Costa Planning Commission held a hearing to consider an
amendment to the Contra Costa County General Plan, 1995-2010, to modify or adjust the
boundary of the County's Urban limit Line. At this meting over 20 people spoke and
expressed their opinion on the proposed modifications to the ULL. The testimony ended at
9:15 P.M. and the Commission unanimously agreed to continue the hearing to the June 27,
2040 regular meeting.
At the June 27, 2000 meeting, the Contra Costa Planning Commission continued the June 20,
2000 ULL hearing and made a motion recommending an amendment to the Contra Costa
General Plan and to modify the ULL. The recommended modification to the ULL will be
consistent with the Board proposed alternative identified in the DEIR.
Page 3 of 5
STAFF .ANALYSIS
The City of Pittsburg has planned for many years to promote planned growth. To promote
planned growth, the City invested considerable amount of staff and financial resources in
identifying appropriate sites for future growth and the proposed general plan has incorporated
these areas into its General Plan Diagram. Additionally, the City in collaboration with the
Delta Diablo Sanitation District developed a Sewer Master Plan. The City is currently in the
processing of preparing a Water Master Plan. Both the studies evaluated fixture growth and as
part of the planning process, these studies have identified specific routes to;lay water, sewer
and other utility lines to meet future needs. To facilitate traffic circulation, the proposed
General Plan has identified new arterial roads.
If the County imposed the proposed Urban Limit Line, the City of Pittsburg will have no
future land to expand. It is limited by the Delta on the North, City of Concord, the Naval
Weapon Station Blast Zone, and the community of Bay Point on the West and the Antioch City
boundary on the East and the Urban Limit Line on the South
At the July 24 and 25, 2000, hearing, the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will be
accepting oral and written testimony on the proposed General amendments and to modify or
adjust the boundary of the ULL. The Contra Costa County Community Development staff is
expected to recommend the Board to accept the Contra Costa Planning Commission's
recommendation to amend the County General Plan (GP#99-01) and modify the boundary of
the ULL as identified in the Environmental Impact Report.
Staff considers it important that the City Council request the Board of Supervisors at their July
24, and 25, 2000 hearings on this matter include properties (San Marco Hills and San Marco
Meadows) adjacent to the approved San Marco developments within the ULL. Additionally, all
properties that have major infrastructure improvements planned for future growth should be
within the ULL. To facilitate planned growth, it is recommended that the following properties
be left within the Urban limit Line;
1) San Masco Hills (West Coast Horne Builders)
2) San Marco .Meadows (West Coast Horne Builders)
3) Bailey Estates Residential Development (John Stremel) and
4) Sky Ranch Development (Gordon Gravel)
Page 4 of 5
RECQXEVIENDA�11
Staff recommends that City Council Adopt Resolution #00-9220 requesting the County
Board of Supervisors adjust the ULL by including the properties identified in "Exhibit A"
within the ULL
in, City Mrr
r
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution No. 00,9220
"Exhibit A" Map identifying the properties that need to be within
the Urban Limit Line.
Staff's comments on the Urban Limit Line Draft Environmental
Report
Map identifying Board Proposed Urban limit Line
Map identifying Board Proposed Alternative Urban limit Line
Map identifying the existing Urban Limit Line
Report Prepared by: Ava indra GaW uram�,
WagangapurmSTAFFRMUrban Limit Line Draft EIR ReportWlc
Page 5 of 5