HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05132003 - C73 C.73
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CALWORNIA
lit"t i
Jsat
.dopted this Order onMay 13- 20Q,1 __ . _ by the following", vote: �
_...__..
AY"ES: Supervisors Gioia, U`:ilken-ia, Glover and Desaulnielll,
OE : `tune
ABSENT., No-ne
ABSTAIN', None
DISTRICT IIIEAT Vt°CANT
ACKNOWLEDGED EDGE receipt of the ietter from the City of San Banton; DIRECTED the
Community nity evelopment Director to draft a letter for the Clair of the Board's signature
outlining the process to be utilized regarding the annual devejopment agreement review.
1 huc- < c ul'ifi, €sr;:€t this is a(Tue and coarc of copy of
all<?bon taknm:1_nd c.here,e`n d1c drIc3'lutes of€11C
Board of Suixmisors on 1he&1€e shown
Ott€i%`,€e` `za' 1_2a 24`t13
John Sweeten,C.lcrh o"the Board
of Supervzsors and Coc niy Admin smator
Ma-Puty Clark
0.1
7al
San Raman
.ALIT(>RN!A
^ RiC R.h54.0
CITY OF SAN RAMON 2222 5147 RAMON
P.O.fooxx 5148
SAN RAMON,CALIFORNIA 94583
April 29, 2003 PHONE: (925)973-2500
UVEB SITE: www.sanramon.ca.gov
Mark DeSaulnier, Chair 1..
Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street, Room 106 x
Martinez, CA 94553 I r
{
Attn: Gina Martin, Chief Clerk
Subject: Norris Canyon Estates (Formerly Wiedemann Ranch);
DP973419; VTM-7575 & 7578
Dear Chair DeSaulnier,
The City of San Ramon respectfully requests that the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors consider this letter and attachments at your regularly scheduled May 13,
2003 Board meeting and agendize a status report on the Norris Canyon Estates project
for a future Board of Supervisors meeting.
The City also request a written response to the questions and issues that are included
in two attached letters, one letter from the Bollinger Hills Homeowners Association in
San Ramon, dated April 28, 2003 and a second letter from a resident in San Ramon,
dated April 28, 2003.
In addition, the City would request that county staff facilitate a public meeting with
interested San Ramon residents at the project site, at which an interactive question and
answer discussion can occur on a pending County application to modify the approved
project grading plan. The City would also seek the support of the project developer, Toll
Brothers, to install several story-poles to simulate the additional fill proposed to be
added and the typical two-story residential building height. These story-poles should be
painted a brightly visible color. We hope that the combination of the story-poles and an
explanation provided by your staff will assist the concerned residents in understanding
the potential visual impacts of the pending grading plan modification.
The City of San Ramon would also appreciate being informed of the status of the
County's Annual Review of the terms and requirements of the project Development
Agreement to determine compliance with the terms of the Agreement.
CITY I.:OFIKm{ 973-2530 �At3MINISTRA1IVF,SERVICE'S:973-2523 DARKS&COMMUN11Y SERVICES:973-3290 B(iI mw,&SAFETY SBRVSCES:973-2580
CITY MANACER:973-2530 PoucE SERVICES=973-2700 AQumx CENTER:973-3240 ECONomlC DF.vEwPMENT SI�.RVICES:973-2550
Cr-Y ArroRNrlw:973-2549 PuaLtc SERVICES:973-2800 '0MMUNIFY CENTER 973-3200 E 3GiNEERING SERVICE
973-2670
CM CLERK:973-2539 Fousi,HOME FARMS;973-3280 Pi.ANN-mj SERvicEs:973-2560
SENIOR CENTER:973-3250 TRANSPORTArM SERVrcrs:973-2650
.......................................................................................................................................................
. .............................................................................................................................................................................................
................................
Board of Supervisors -Norris Canyon Estates
April 29, 2003
Page 2 of 2
We would greatly appreciate the courtesy and support of the Board of Supervisors in
consideration of our request on this matter. Should you have any questions please
contact me directly at (925) 973-2530.
Sincerely,
day E. Waiters
City Manager
Attachments:
1. Letter from Bollinger Hills Homeowners Association, dated April 28, 2003
2. Letter from Resident at 2634 Derby Drive, dated April 28, 2003
Cc: Mayor and City Council
Victor Peterson, President, Bollinger Hills HOA, P.O. Box 449, San Ramon, CA
94583
Jim Zelinski, 2634 Derby Drive, San Ramon, CA 94583
Dennis Barry, Community Development Director, Contra Costa County, 651 Pine
Street, 4th Floor, North Wing, Martinez, CA 94553
Michael O'Hara, Toll Brothers, Inc., 100 Park Place, Suite. 120, San Ramon, CA
94583
Jaye Fukuda, Public Works Director
Phil Wong, Planning Services Manager
c03.073-Board of Supervisors-Norris Canyon Est.-5-1-03
1
! �_ Rf
APR 2 9 2003
r
J ,gyp Cmr Of.SAN RAMON
C9 PLANNING SERVICES
Mayor H.Abram Wilson
2222 Camino Ramon ;
San Ramon,CA 94583 April 28, .``f
Dear Mayor Wilson,
Thank you in advance for reviewing and responding to the request from the Bollinger Hills
Homeowners Association for the City of San Ramon to obtain information from Contra Costa
County regarding Norris Canyon Estates development. On behalf of the Bollinger Hills Horne
Owners Association I am providing you a list of questions that we would like the County to
an by May 16, 2003. This letter also outlines questions to the City of San Ramon and again
we are respectfully requesting that the City provide these answers in writing.
The Bollinger Hills Association has had a number of residents that are concerned about the
potential view impact from development in the Norris Canyon Estates project. There is concern
that previously approved development agreements may not have been followed in some cases,
with adverse impact to the Bollinger Hills community. There is additional concern that further
development plans are potentially in work(that have yet to be disclosed to the public)that would
also impact Bollinger Hills residents.
We are requesting your answers at least two weeks prior to a public hearing on this matter,
hopefully before the San Ramon Regional Valley Planning Commission as discussed at the April
8,2003 City Council meeting. We very much appreciate the City's assistance in this matter.
If you have any questions for us, please contact our Board Director John Youngblood at
(925)830— 1872. (e-mail AQC mattbi.com)
Best Regards.* -
�,.
LIZZ11-
Victor Petersen
President,Bollinger Hills HOA
CC: Gail Waiters, San Ramon City Manager
San Ramon City Council Members
Attachments: Questions for Contra Costa County,Questions for the City of San Ramon
Bollinger Hills Homeowner Association • PO. Box 449 • San Ramon, CA 94583-0449 • 925 833-0498
.............
..........
-ARachment one: QUESTIONS FOR CONTRA COSTA COUNTY April 28,2003
1. Does the County intend to respond to the Association's January 29,20x13 letter to Bob Drake?
2. Will any structures in the Norris Canyon Estates project be visible from any part of the Bollinger Hills
community?
3. What is the location and extent that these structures will be visible?
4. Is the County willing to request that the developer make a written commitment that houses will not be
visible to residents of Bollinger Hills or other San Ramon/Tri-Valley regions whose residents previously
understood that houses would not be visible?
5. When will the story poles be erected as required by County planner Bob Drake in his March 8,2003
letter to Toll Brothers?
6. Will the County/developer allow the public at large to tour the site to view story poles as requested by
residents?
7. How many lots does the developer propose to increase in height? What are the lot numbers? Lot
location?
8. What is the number(and location)of lots whose height has already been increased prior to obtaining
formal approval?
9. Will the proposed development/lot(s)height increase make the houses visible to Bollinger Hills
residents?
10. Has developer extended or propose to"tend the approved "development footprint"with lots or roads
outside the original subdivision maps?
11. Has the County notified in writing the East Bay Regional Park District, San Ramon Regional Valley
Planning Commission,U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers,State Department of Fish&Game, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service,of any proposed or completed changes to the development and have adverse impacts.
addressed?
12. Has the county conducted an annual review every year as required in the 1995 development agreement?
If so, how can residents obtain copies of these annual reviews?
13. If annual reviews have not been conducted,is this considered a default of the development agreement?
14. Is the developer meeting all conditions of approval, required environmental mitigations and fulfilling all
obligations as required in development agreement,the permit, and Environmental Impact Report(FIR)?
Where is the County documentation of such?
15. Please request that the developer put in writing that the former"water collection basin"on an eastern
perimeter of the project site -overlooking Derby Drive-will not be a housing site, as previously
promised by the developer's former project manager. Will the area be reforested? The former project
manager mentioned above has stated that this area would be reforested and is nota proposed site for
housing or any other structure. (Residents don't understand why reforestation has not begun).
Attachment two. QUESTIONS and COMMENTS FOR THE CITY OF SAN RAMON April 28,2003
1. Do any of the proposed changes related to development/lot height increases conflict with any San
Ramon or County ordinance or policy or environmental or planning document related to protection of
the "'Westside" area or county ridge lands? 'These include City of San Ramon general plan/Westside
plans?
2. Does San Ramon have - under current legal precedent- any"influence"over land-use decisions
involving land that may be annexed by the City of San Ramon?
3. Please request that any proposed changes to final development plan be heard in a public hearing in San
Ramon before the San Ramon Valley Regional Planning-Commission during the evening to allow
residents the opportunity to attend.
0V23 2003 11:51 92524209: JAMES 2ELINSKI�,i
.�•--""' PACS 01
Cl
APR-
April 28,2003 l TY OF SAN PAON
MaaWor R Abram Wirt � ~ � ',�PLANNING SERVICES
2222.Caaaa w Ramon,San Ramona,CA
3
5438 ]
Ticar Maya Was": .f
Thank you in Advowx for obtaining ansvms in writing fivm t COM C.ajaty rt:S±srtlits Me Nw€is
Canyo>st Entat WW Rauch pa qe d fa=tter rftred to as the"Es"NaWFae�ci�")and the SD.Cw ed
"Westside*am I am request ng that the foliaw ing qwwons be answered by May 13.
I nmlm this requesat p uud to#be City Councirs plede on Apil 8 to Vrow tlue interests'o[Sart Ramon
reside=nts during a Cotumn&wussi Q 3ega41W weed rem for aitfrvie in8xr=stiort Wpoft#60
Proposed Or cOntmaPbled avada a to the'Erpdut Raab"fm dcvetcpmouut Pum Artsam
kichode but tray not*mired to panope»rl to"allow�grade for development to be MOM...along
Cum-Valky RidV
I believe the above stawmew in quotes r*uftg**niillted grade...to be Woe{fiput a tomerfroft
County Planner Bob 7Jra3ue)it as critical as the gnuratitxc�hteUvidual lots. Ti a best:tlsa
croes-valley 1tWv in visz'bta DOM vs**"10ftWvs'*Mg t the Czty lu WO AS Bishop Rv=*Regio
ud
Open Space-a very Popular and beautti43ul hiking ales.
1801 inreceipt of a letter Om the geu3tiuugsr Letts%mownerrs Asuiseiation to Yost. ktter
answers in writing,PIC=inchWjc my questions in rho PM*A that win be sent to 016 CoComay�►ig t
it ProvWe answers to the city in wri ft
I} Ig the Cnasnty aware Q(WW'WItW8.or viral promise,or sWeme of d n*g mW meeting pdor to pnaet
approval*At the*EsUU*lRarsch"development w not be visible to residents of Bab*"HiUs or
otbtr points in San Rarr►oe Tti-vauq? Ater thm any such pt=dsesl5W==ts irk&W
document4wirapondence or vides beld or orauralued by thm CNmW Or or lop*l)or r
estaic agents or or fixations mVzdW&this p*W (As you knntr, Dave Hudson
=rated at tke April 8,3803 Cour it meeting#bArt lass peoab t>mt Cub a few Ilu=ft->Wn*d#1*-would
be visible fim a*w paints in the Tri-Vatky: As you awne,*e+kr Caawatt it-wig"
e=R*OS Of AM ClUdbra hes*a dy tatsW that it bdie-vcs a County fah erode
oral asstsraucce dust bouscs.would no be vr'sabk fteu Deft D in Boljttgeyr HW or .
2) How awW bmL"s can be brunt on the CrowValley Ridge under appro"A Plast? Does davesloW
pry to nic:r0 aso'nuumber of boom on Ridgy via ants? Vag##*0 pwagW*W W=g"in
Wsk Of rokk other itma u=anti iaa at nishwed gradef ehevtttitox�hedgld)of'tha a devatttipmeM on do
Cron Valley Ridge;? Its other worsts,HOW`MUM W(IN R up Vallety d*dors rhes
devCI*W want to build houses or nx ds-BEYOND what is eeuanaeatly AWpre'WV h it two tea,100
ricer,300 fW etc?MXAW ASIC THE COUNT'To pA0VlI E MCT EMVATION
INCREASE). Hos ineseasah des height of roads,structures or rid Wade of the
developr 4w pr wto&Wnft formal Cougly/OdW alb?
Nota:This is a diftreat gtstion than The oft BoUjgSer Ili&Homoow uers Asw4fttlon raises
wFolins]ors in its April 28'letter to you mW the City C.owicd).
3)Why is the de veloptrs propeerirng to WUM flaislod geek of the developtnim andtcr lot Right an Cross
Valley R elg e? Is it to b=tw hw uW value?These is NO requirement to raise bd&o(devolopmetut or
IM as noted by Bob Drake its March 8 kstta. Has COY approved,all V~Ilft do data?LaV
moua ds of dirt wsav p m oudy*Xtoatrpjjed"on a call-de on IjouateastarnpaimC W of"PVOM
Koby Cbiveertout-aiEUe m ftmer ODiUAY supervisor Do ns Geiter-pru ouasty stored that thus will be
mthaved"bey Matt"2002 per&-Mopn*m con&dtauit. Has all that been mwvW? When?
04/294-e 3 12:15 925242' '4 ,TAMES ZELINSKI
PAGE 02
44)t �Dm County intend to to or amend pyo coodiit s inde iSo regtrict€ans fair+fir Valley
NOTE:Page IS Of C.tntd€ti m of Annoval(APPROVED Pl`RI=4/30148)cites"Digo Re tions
t"te. r( •Valley Ridge"'-these include"P�SSIBi.Ic 1ntrr3[tkat nP STitLJCTj "
14W along A Nift i0 the vicWty oftl Mass
lot 1 in SV31*NOW{lour 10,48 5t3-9 I adul divtSioiz 799g);. #boa subject to a �teviel by the ZOtg Administrator,...VW tuant
...and the RW*menW LDPW Rept whkb identified the following reeatrictim on these lots."
? Dons ft PW Bay Regional ft&District,Com Filaand 0204 et,,, to VXm aW 64,Westo
"ft&t"ftnW' ross Valley`Ridge sub&visiona raider aplrroval caodttiotWd, p t
6) If there is R tl&at of ft development agr ttentr is CorMy regnired to hold*Womd public
haulage an the attire pros=or on a#recW subdivisions whaae c11844105 are pfOPOW or.Dire alrewjy
comp? Dou this=Nfitlft 4 VIOhttion of the Cal for u EwAroanwaw Quay ACT(C QA)?
7) Why did the devolopet r propose to an au O SPW arm 4aceut to project with 17,t100 tabic yW&of
dict? Did any p of this dirt trocar without�approval? Has #ops'removed my and all
dirt that my have been duatped/bore? (Sot lull rch k 2003 Bob Drake ter).
9) Have any roads been built or graded nest to tanduwwets-whose ply is c�vxmerxtty iu ag&altural
status which sold accommodate 2kd&tiong growth in tl�e future? I,E.-exteasiou to Sid CoMe s
P ly'or O"Odly agpz+ 40'r mlff_a tx tdi or c ontensplated subdivisions erns t'ble Ran
Ramon Vatley'Houlevard or otber°roads?
9) &ve any U0*nvneri had ikrtal/for nol discussions with or s utboun d pim 6o theC*i Counly to
chis their land including but not limited to*Dft ttg egg dswclopnwnt agneem m or
"u ng"or"Asndoning*deveEs+psxtent sites in*Estat,=AU t"pmjec,Westside Area Oi:a_Sid
Cosine,Weidentao Awdly or Toll Broshe IM? If so,when will these distxrs10ns be xoade;tic?
.Are there Stahl reports on these yrs?
10)Have deve3op $)/W stride b0dorovuet s discussed ftmany or k4rmally with City or City
mPeftntatives the Concept of 00anecting Norris Canyog Esti w to the Come p vprecty actor the
"flaks,""GreySOW*D-ftidon"Or"Twin Creeks"subcgvis =?
11)Wb*dAnges'n euvironMGttW conditions ar&W develolmttent plat#Would require a
StWkmC#"UMW ettYfi`DSWMW I,IZPkCt rEp Wpubhc m4tw of" tatCsfR<rch-p vjW?
12)Can the Coatnty rem developer to 004tider elirnt=tioa or salon of lvtsllt+tattrtes on thz from.
Valley Ridge if devel s)laveo t+plied whh All a of Ol prowl,EIRE A
bvd
mi i��,development agreement of local, federal law? - +
13) 'bat's the visual andtor eOWtWWMW impact to the bishop RancA R:egiorW open Spam from the
Fppost d deveiopmenttlots height mew? Will boom be vide f m Bites Ranch
Sly as a result Ofd changes ter 10"or d W)OPn beight increase? tial
Open�perlC mly Plan to adhere to mitigaW related to Bishop Ranch bions!Open Space as noted
in condition of Approval?
14) If pvOpo$ed o hNISM or original plaits will make houses v sfbk to Bollinger MWOdw San Rant
r addents who pwomed tbW boas on the wdierstanding that the T4urtt"tltaru6-ptr gcct would
NOT be visible,does develotper P14n to compe=te such hxneowners for loss of Views,,diminished
Fsoper'values? Would developers)pumbase additional opal space for the Bishop Rauch RegipW
Open Space in addition to prmvubug compensa#fon to aged homeowners?
X14123!'2003 12:15 925242-14 JAMES ZEL.INSKI PAGE 03
On=again,dank you f'or'ming these cowM WW ung# �in�from Ilse
County.
Pkae Py*v*a OOPS'Ofd*Cosy`s nxpcnsa to the BolixW MUs Homtow.A.Watia and .,u
waif as any City of San Ramon w=voad=w on tfiesa nattem with the County or otba aplye�.
may.
26734 D=bybrive
San R,=M CA
9583
Ce. San Rasm City mwwger Gail Wafters;sari Rasnon City counw
REQUEST TO SPEAK FOR113
(THREE f3). MIWTE LIMIT)
PLEASE PRINT LEGIDLY
Complete this form and place it in the boxnear the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board,
Narr#e; 4 Phone
Address:" RdreCity :' A � Zip Code:
I am,speaking for myself or organization: .*tt
(naive of organization)
CiEC Ql€ r
I wish to speak on Agenda Item## Z'— , 7 Date . f/-3
My Comments will begeneral_ 'Jnr agaidst
i>wish to speak on the subject of
I"do not:wish to speak on the subject but leave these comments for the board to consider: