HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 04052005 - D.2 •D. `2�
RD OF SUPERVISORS
TO: BOA
I •
Contra
FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICD °�. .:.rig:~=�r ;` Costa
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR _r_,:..•••` County
ra c�-U
DATE: April 5, 2005
SUBJECT: Continued Hearing on an Appeal by Lionsgate Development Corporation on a
County Planning Commission Approval of a Tentative Map Application for
Three Parcels at##2501 Warren Road in the Walnut Creek/Saranap area. County
File ##MS030015 (Lionsgate Dev. Corp. --Ap. & Owner) (Sup. Dist. 11)
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
i. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Motion to:
A. DENY the appeal of Lionsgate Development Corporation;
B. ADOPT the findings contained in Exhibit A as the basis for approval of this
project;
C. ADOPT the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration as adequate for
purposes of determining this project's compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act.
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE
ECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROV OTHER
SIGNATURE(S).
ACTION OF BOIV V
ON A0-PPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND
X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND
AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN
E A --
Contact: Ruben Hernandez [(925)335-1339] ATTESTED JraWw'
cc:Lionsgate Development Corporation JOHN SWEETEN, XICERK OF THE BOARD OF
DeBolt Civil Engineering SUPERVISOR4 AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
Community Development Dept.
Public Works Dept. -
Building Inspection Dept. BY PUTY
County Counsel
April 5, 2005
Board of Supervisors
File#MS030015(Lionsgate Dev.)
Page 2
Further, the documents or other material, which constitute the record
of proceedings upon which the Board's decision on this CEQA
determination is based, are located at the office of the Community
Development Department, 651 Pine Street, Martinez.
D. ADOPT the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program.
E. SUSTAIN the County Planning Commission approval of the Tentative
Subdivision map application for three parcels as conditioned.
F. DIRECT staff to post a Notice of Determination with the County
Clerk.
11. FISCAL IMPACT: None. The applicant is responsible for all staff time and
material costs in the processing of this application.
Ill. BACKGROUND
The applicant is attempting to subdivide a 39,000+ square foot (0.91-acre) property into
three parcels. The tentative map application was filed with the Community Development
Department on May 20, 2003. The property is located at the southeast corner of the
Boulevard Way and Warren Road intersection, in the Walnut Creek/Saranap area. The site
also lies alongside Las Trampas Creek.
A. Zoninq Administrator Hearing and Decision
The application was initially heard before the Zoning Administrator on April 19, 2004.
At that hearing the Zoning Administrator approved the tentative map for two lots
instead of three. The decision was based on the fact that half of the subject property
was within the creek structure setback easement area, which would have prevented
development on all of Parcel 'C' and half of Parcel 'B .
B. Applicant's Appeal of Zoning Administrator Decision and Initial County Planning
Commission Hearing and Decision
The applicant appealed the Zoning Administrator's approval to the County Planning
Commission. On August 24, 2004, after continuing the first hearing in order to allow
the applicant an opportunity to submit additional missing information, the Commission
denied the project without prejudice.
C. Planninq Commission Hearinq on Reconsideration Request
Following the Planning Commission denial, the applicant filed for reconsideration.
The applicant indicated that he was willing to provide the Public Works Department
with new information to better evaluate the merits of his project and on September
147 2005, the Planning Commission unanimously voted to grant the reconsideration
request, and to allow the matter to be scheduled for hearing.
April 5,2005
Board of Supervisors
File#MS030015(Lionsgate Dev.)
Page 3
The Planning Commission conducted a hearing on the applicant's reconsideration
request on January 25, 2005. Staff reported that the applicant had proposed the
construction of a buried retaining (caisson) wall. The proposal provides for the
construction of an intermittent retaining wall at the top of the creek bank, intended to
stabilize the development site immediately adjacent to the creek. The preliminary
plans indicate that the wall would be supported by 18-inch cast-in-place I-beam steel
piers and concrete cement placed at six-foot intervals, with an overall length of
approximately 92-feet.
Based on the creekside improvements proposed by the applicant, and additional
conditions recommended by staff, staff recommended that the Planning Commission
approve all three proposed parcels.
After taking testimony, the Planning Commission voted to approve the revised
application generally as recommended by staff.
D. Applicant's Appeal of Planning Commission Approval
In a letter dated February 3, 2005, the applicant appealed the County Planning
Commission conditional approval of the project. The appeal raises nine (9) appeal
points covering a range of subjects.
E. March 1, 2005 Appeal Hearing Before the Board of Supervisors
The Board of Supervisors initially heard the appeal of the Planning Commission's
approval on March 1, 2005. The staff report for that hearing reviewed the points of
appeal contained in the applicant's appeal letter, and determined that none had
merit. The staff report recommended that the Board deny the applicant's appeal and
sustain the Planning Commission's approval of the project, as conditioned.
At the hearing, staff also presented visual evidence and oral testimony describing the
project, and its environs and addressing major points of the appeal. At the hearing,
staff modified the staff recommendation that was contained in the staff report. Rather
than act on the matter at the March 1 hearing, staff recommended that the Board
declare its intent to deny the appeal and sustain the Planning Commission action,
and to continue the open hearing to this date to allow additional time for staff to
prepare recommended findings for Board consideration and adoption.
After accepting testimony from the applicant and other interested parties, the Board
unanimously voted to declare its intent to deny the applicant's appeal and sustain the
County Planning Commission approval, as conditioned; continued the open public
hearing on the appeal to this date; and directed staff to prepare recommended
findings on this project for the Board's consideration and adoption action.
April 5, 2005
Board of Supervisors
File#MS030015(Lionsgate Dev.)
Page 4
IV. DISCUSSION
A. Recommended Project Findings
Staff is recommending that the Board adopt the findings contained in Exhibit "A" as
%.V
the basis for the Board's actions.
B. Follow-up on Items Discussed in Initial Board Hearing
The following reviews matters discussed at the previous Board hearing of this appeal.
1. Concerns With Alterations to Project Site Drainage Conditions
During the March 1. 2005 hearing, concern was raised with regard to
alterations to onsite drainage facilities that were being constructed. The
matter had come to the attention of staff as a result of a complaint from the
public. Public Works Department staff discovered that new storm drain
facilities were being installed across the Project Site, replacing the existing
privately owned and maintained facilities (that had been installed years before)
without benefit of permits or inspection, and in violation of the Drainage
Ordinance.
On September 30, 2003, the Public Works Department posted a Stop-Work
Order notifying the property owner to (1) cease any construction or alteration
work affecting site drainage conditions; (2) that cited activity violates
provisions in the Drainage Ordinance; and (3) that a permit must be obtained
from the County. This is a requirement of every owner of private property in
the unincorporated area of the County who wishes to alter drainages
conditions on or across their property.
No County permit has been obtained from the County to date, and Public
Works indicates that the alterations to drainage facilities remain a violation of
the Ordinance Code. The applicant may wish to use these facilities as part of
the drainage improvements that may be required for this subdivision. If the
applicant intends to use these facilities as part of the on-site drainage system
to comply with the "collect and convey" drainage requirement of the
Subdivision Ordinance,' at time of filing the Parcel Map, and related drainage
improvement plans and analysis, the subdivider will need to either verify the
adequacy of this storm drain (both hydraulically and structurally) or remove
and reconstruct the facilities under proper County inspection.
2. Concern with Who May Develop Property
CCC Ord.Code§§914-2.002,et seq.
April 5, 2005
Board of Supervisors
File#MS030015 (Lionsgate Dev.)
Page 5
At the March 1, 2005 hearing, concern was also raised with who may develop
property, including construction of drainage facilities.
Drainage Improvements or Alterations - With regards to alteration of drainage
facilities, before proposed drainage improvements may be built, or drainage
facilities may be altered, an applicant must obtain a drainage permit from the
Public Works Department. The permit must be based on plans that have been
stamped by a registered civil engineer. However, anyone may construct the
permitted improvements provided that they are in accord with the approved
permit plans, and the standards and specifications of the County.
Building and Grading Improvements - In terms of issuance of building or
grading permits, the Building Inspection Department requires that a licensed
contractor do all work, unless the work is to be done by an owner/builder.
Processing of Tentative M - With regards to processing a tentative map
application, the Subdivision Map Act defines a "subdivider" as a person, firm,
corporation, partnership or association who proposes to divide, divides or
causes to be divided real property into a subdivision for himself or for others
except that employees and consultants of such persons or entities, acting in
such capacity are not "subdividers." (Gov. Code § 66423)
The current assessors tax roll identifies Lionsgate Development Corporation
as the current owner of the subject property.
V. CONCLUSION
Based on the modified findings in Exhibit A, the whole of the record before the Board, the
foregoing review in the previous staff report to the Board, and testimony presented to the
Board at this and the previous hearings, staff recommends that the Board deny the appeal
and sustain the approval of the project as conditioned by the County Planning Commission.
GACurrent Plan n ing\cu rr-plan\Board\Board Orders\MS030015 cont. bo.11.doc
RLH
ADDENDUM
D.2 April 5,2005
On this date the Board considered the appeal filed by the Lionsgate Development Corporation (Applicant and
owner) of the County Planning Commission decision to approve a tentative subdivision map (MS03 0015),
subject to conditions, to divide a 0.91 acre property into three lots located at 2501 Warren Road in the
Walnut Creek/Saranap area, as continued from March 1, 2005.
Catherine Kutsuris, Community Development Department,, presented the staff report.
The Chair invited the public to comment. The following persons presented testimony:
Kenneth Barker(applicant), Lionsgate Development Corporation, 2340 Royal Oaks Drive, Alamo;
Clint Shaw, 1430 Boulevard Way, Walnut Creek;
Charles Wall 681 Center Street, Walnut Creek.
Having heard from staff and all those desiring to comment,, the Board took the following actions:
1. CLOSED the public hearing;
2. DENIED the appeal-,
3. ADOPTED findings of the Community Development Department as the basis for approval of the
project, said findings amended this day to replace the phrases on page F-16 under section C.1
(A)(1) "granted an exception to the ftontage improvement requirement'' and "granted that project
an exception to the ftontage improvement requirement'' with the phrase "allowed the applicant to
enter into a deferred improvement agreement'' ;
4. ADOPTED the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration as adequate for purposes of determining
this project's compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act;
5. ADOPTED the proposed Mitigation Monitoring Program;
6. SUSTAINED the County Planning Commission approval of the Tentative subdivision map
application for three parcels as conditioned;
7. and DIRECTED staff to post a notice of Determination with the County Clerk.
(AYES: 1, 111, IV and 11;NOES: none; ABSENT: V; ABSTAIN: none)
EXHIBIT 66A99
Findings
Board of Supervisors
Contra Costa County
Apri15, 2005
Lionsgate Development Corporation Appeal of
County Planning Commission Approval of
Minor Subdivision County File#MS030015
#2501 Warren Road
Walnut Creek/Saranap area
(APN 184-150-029)
Lionsgate Development Corporation
(Applicant, Appellant, and Owner)
i
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lion'sgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-1
I. General Considerations
Reliance on Record. Each and all of the findings and determinations
contained herein are based on the competent and substantial evidence,both
oral and written, contained in the entire record relating to the Project and
constitute the independent findings and determinations of this Board.
General Plan and Zoning
A. General Plan Desimation of the Project Site
The land use map of the County General Plan designates most of the
Project Site Single-Family Residential-Medium Density (SM). The land
use map designates a portion of the southeast comer of the Project Site
within the Open Space(OS) designation, adjacent to Las Trampas Creek.
The General Plan defines the SM designation as follows:
Single-Family Residential-Medium Density (SM). This
designation allows between 3.0 - 4.9 single family units per net
acre. Primary land uses that are permitted in the SM designation
include detached single-family homes and accessory structures.
Secondary uses generally considered to be compatible with
medium density homes may be allowed, including home
occupations, small residential care and child care facilities,
churches and similar places of worship, secondary dwelling units,
and other uses and structures incidental to the primary uses.
The General Plan defines the OS designation as follows:
Open Space: This General Plan designation includes publicly
owned, open space lands which are not designated as "Public and
Semi-Public,," "Watershed," or "Parks and Recreation." Lands
designated "Open Space" include, without limitation,wetlands and
tidelands and other areas of significant ecological resources, or
geologic hazards.
The "Open Space" designation also includes privately owned
properties for which future development rights have been deeded
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-3
to a public or private agency. For example, significant open space
areas within planned unit developments identified as being owned
and maintained by a homeowners association fall under this
designation. Also included are the steep, unbuildable portions of
approved subdivisions which may be deeded to agencies such as
the EBRPD but which have not been developed as park facilities.
Other privately owned lands have been designated as "Open
Space"consistent with adopted city General Plans.
The most appropriate uses in "Open Space" areas involve resource
management, such as maintaining critical marsh and other
endangered habitats or establishing "safety zones" around
identified geologic hazards. Other appropriate uses are low
intensity, private recreation for nearby residents. The construction
of permanent structures, excluding a single-family residence on an
existing legally established lot, not oriented towards recreation or
resource conservation, is inconsistent with this open space
designation. One single-family residence on an existing legal lot is
consistent with this designation.
B. Zoning (Land Use)District of Project Site and Environs
The Project Site is zoned Single Family Residential, R-10, which requires
a minimum parcel size of 10,000 square feet. The area surrounding the
Project Site is also located within the R-10 zoning district.
III.
Proi ect Environs
Most of the area surrounding the Project Site consists of detached single-
family residences on parcels generally ranging in size from one-quarter acre to
one acre. Much of the surrounding area is rural residential in character
consisting of lots that were largely created prior to enactment of subdivision
regulations. The roads are paved,but other public improvements that are
normally required for higher density residential development under current
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-3
subdivision review procedures (e.g., curbs, gutter, sidewalk, drainage) are
either not generally present or exist on a limited basis in the surrounding
residential area.
Las Trampas Creek
The Project Site adjoins Las Trampas Creek. The section of the creek that the
Project Site adjoins is privately owned and not maintained by the County or
other public or private organized entity(e.g.,homeowners association). A
soldier pile wall within and along a relatively short section of the northwest
side of the creek has been constructed by the property owner on the property
immediately to the east of the Project Site. This bank was experiencing severe
erosion and the wall provides a measure of protection against the threat of
continued creek bank erosion from storm flows in the creek; however, the
remainder of the creek at this location is in a natural, unimproved state. The
creek bed as well as the banks upstream, downstream and across the creek
from the soldier pile wall, is subject to the influence of flows within Las
Trampas Creek.
The Ordinance Code defines an unimproved channel as a"watercourse that
has been left as much as possible in its natural state.""' An improved channel is
defined as"a watercourse which has been modified through man-made
construction including (but not limited to) increasing the width and/or depth
of it, straightening its alignment, or stabilizing the banks of it through grading,
concrete, riprap or other means."2 A watercourse is "any natural or man-made
channel for transporting water, including the stream bed and the banks,
whether continuously flowing or intermittent."3
The aforementioned soldier pile wall adjacent to the Project Site is an isolated
erosion control project. The wall protects only a small portion of the
northwest bank. The wall does not stabilize the banks of the creek; on the
contrary,the rest of the creek remains substantially in a natural state.
The section of the creek in question has not been studied and has not
undergone significant improvements across the entire channel section,
including its banks and streambed, so that the entire channel would adequately
convey the design flow and not be subject to the erosive forces that are
typically experienced in a natural, unimproved creek. Accordingly, this
section of creek meets the definition of an unimproved channel pursuant to
Section 1010-6.026 of the Ordinance Code.
1 CCC Ord.Code§ 1010-6.026
2 CCC Ord. Code § 1010-6.014
3 CCC Ord.Code § 1010-6.028
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-4
Downstream of the Project Site is an example of an improved channel.
IV. Description of the Project Site
The 0.91-acre Project Site is located on the southeast corner of the Warren
Road and Boulevard Way intersection in the Saranap Area of Walnut Creek at
#2501 Warren Road. The tentative map indicates that the Project Site contains
a single-family residence and shed on the north side of the Project Site
adjacent to Warren Road. There are no curb, gutter or sidewalk improvements
along either the Warren Road or Boulevard Way frontages of the Project Site.
Drainage Patterns and Improvements - The Project Site is located at the very
lowest downstream end of a small tributary watershed to Las Trampas Creek.
The natural drainage of the area around the property flows toward the Project
Site to Las Trampas Creek.
The storm drain system that traverses the Project Site, from the road right-of-
way near the back of a storm drain junction box at the northeast corner of
Warren Road and Boulevard Way to its outfall into Las Trampas Creek, is
considered to be a privately owned and maintained system. County staff has
researched County records and found no evidence that the County ever
installed the pipe across the Project Site. There are no public drainage
easements or rights-of-way on the Project Site.
V. Project Description
The Project consists of an application for tentative map approval to subdivide
the Project Site, which is 0.91-acre in area, into three (3) parcels, ranging in
size from 10,000 to 17,800 square feet. The existing residence would remain
on proposed Parcel A.
To address concerns about proposed residential development in proximity to
Las Trampas Creek and the related hazard of creek bank failure potentially
damaging future development, the Subdivider proposes to construct an
intermittent (buried caisson) retaining wall adjacent to the eastern boundary of
the Project Site at the top of the Las Trampas Creek bank. The preliminary
plans show the wall placed near the top of the creek bank, at the rear of Parcel
C. The wall is comprised of 18-inch diameter drilled piers placed at six-foot
intervals along the proposed alignment, with a total length of approximately
92-feet. The piers will be cast-in-place steel I-beam and concrete.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-5
Except for the proposed placement of the intermittent retaining wall within the
required rear and side yards of proposed parcels, the Project complies with
minimum parcel area and dimension requirements of the R-10 zoning district.
VI. �Relevant General Plan GoalsPolicies and Implementation
Measures
The County General Plan sets forth various goals, policies and
implementation measures. These include the following provisions that are
relevant to the project.
On January 18, 2005,the Board of Supervisors adopted an update to the
Contra Costa County General Plan, entitled Contra Costa County General
Plan, 2005—2020. The following citations are from the "Public Hearing
Reconsolidated Draft, January 2005, "upon which the Plan adoption action by
the Board of Supervisors was based.
A. Land Use Element
For the following goals,policies and implementation measures,refer to
pp. 3-22, et seq.
Goal 3-A. To coordinate land use with circulation, development of
other infrastructure facilities, and protection of agriculture
and open space, and to allow growth and the maintenance
of the County's quality of life. In such an environment all
residential, commercial, industrial, recreational and
agricultural activities may take place in safety, harmony,
and to mutual advantage.
Policy 3-5. New development within unincorporated areas of the
County may be approved, providing growth management
standards and criteria are met or can be assured of being
met prior to the issuance of building permits in accordance
with the growth management.
Policy 3-29. New housing projects shall be located on stable and secure
lands or shall be designed to mitigate adverse or potentially
adverse conditions. Residential densities of conventional
construction shall generally decrease as the natural slope
increases.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-6
Implementation
Measure 3-c. Where appropriate, require the dedication of deeded
development rights to the County (or cooperate in
dedication to other public agencies) for lands to be
protected as open space.
B. Growth Management Element
The following discussion on goals, policies, and implementation measures
may be found on pp. 4-3, et seq.
Goal 4-A. To provide for the levels of growth and development
depicted in the Land Use Element, while preserving and
extending the quality of life through the provision of public
facilities and ensuring traffic levels of services necessary to
protect the public health, safety and welfare.
Policy 4-1. New development shall not be approved in unincorporated
areas unless the applicant can provide the infrastructure
which meets the traffic level of service and performance
standards outlined in Policy 4-3, or a funding mechanism
has been established which will provide the infrastructure
to meet the standards or as is stated in other portion of this
Growth Management Element.
Policy 4-2. If it cannot be demonstrated prior to project approval that
levels of service will be met per Policy 4-1, development
will be temporarily deferred until the standards can be met
or assured. Projects which do not, or will not, meet the
standards shall be scheduled for hearing before the
appropriate hearing body with a staff recommendation for
denial, on the grounds that the project is inconsistent with
the goals, policies, and objectives of the Growth
Management Element of the County General Plan.
C. Transportation and Circulation Element
The following discussion on goals, policies, and implementation measures
may be found at pp. 5-12, et seq.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File 4MS03-0015
Page F-7
The Transportation and Circulation Element includes a County Roadway
Network Plan4 that designates Boulevard Way an Existing Arterial, and
Warren Road an Existing Collector.
The Plan defines Arterials as follows:
Arterials move traffic to and from freeways, expressways or
collectors and are part of an integrated system of major through
roadways. Their traffic function is of countywide or intercity
importance,rather than serving primarily local area traffic.
The Plan defines Collectors as follows:
Collectors are for internal traffic movement within a community,
carrying traffic to arterials and between neighborhoods. They are
low speed roadways that do not ordinarily carry a high proportion
of through trips and are not, of necessity, continuous for great
lengths.
The following goals, policies and implementation measures may be found
at pp. 5-24, et seq.
Goal 5-A To provide a safe, efficient and balanced transportation
system.
Goal 5-C. To balance transportation and circulation needs with the
desired character of the community.
Policy 5-13. Physical conflicts between vehicular traffic,, bicyclists, and
pedestrians shall be minimized.
Policy 5-14. Adequate lighting shall be provided for vehicular,
pedestrian , and bicyclist safety, consistent with
neighborhood desires.
Policy 5-15. Curb and sidewalks shall be provided in appropriate areas.
D. Public Facilities/Services Element
4
4 The General Plan contains two versions of the County Roadway Network Plan. A large scale(I I x 17-
inch exhibit found in the sleeve in the rear of the General Plan contains all of the detail of the Roadway
Network Plan,,including collector streets. A smaller scale(8 1/2x 11-inch)exhibit of the Roadway Network
Plan(found on pg. 5-12,Figure 5-2)omits some of the detail found on the large-scale map;the smaller
scale version of the Roadway Network Plan does not show the designated Existing or Proposed Collectors.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-8
The following goals, policies and implementation measures may be found
at pp. 7-16, et seq.
Goal 7-S. To encourage private programs which assure ongoing
maintenance of natural watercourses utilizing methods
which retain the characteristics of natural watercourses.
Implementation
Measure 7-ah. Protect natural channels that are not to be maintained by
government by requiring dedicated development rights;
protect storm drain pipes by requiring drainage easements;
and seek to secure open government-maintained facilities
by fee title land rights.
E. Conservation Element
The following goals, policies and implementation measures may be found
at pp. 8-46, et seq.
Goal 8-U. To maintain the ecology and hydrology of creeks and
streams and provide an amenity to the public, while at the
same time preventing flooding, erosion and danger to life
and property.
Policy 8-89. Setback areas shall be provided along natural creeks and
streams in areas planned for urbanization. The setback
areas shall be of a width adequate to allow maintenance and
to prevent damage to adjacent structures, the natural
channel and associated riparian vegetation. The setback
area shall be a minimum of 100 feet; 50 feet on each side of
the centerline of the creek.
Policy 8-90. Deeded development rights for lands within established
setback areas along creeks or streams shall be sought to
assure creek preservation and to protect adjacent structures
and the loss of private property.
Implementation
Measure 8-cu. Review all public and private projects adjacent to and
within creeks and streams to determine their conformance
with the policies of this General Plan.
Implementation
Measure 8-cw. During the review of proposed development plans, the
County staff shall require a building setback of at least 100
i
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-9
feet along natural creeks and streams, and seek to obtain
deeded development rights on lands within setback areas.
Implementation
Measure 8-cx. New parcels which are created shall include adequate space
outside of the watercourses' setback areas for pools, patios,
and appurtenant structures to ensure that property owners
will not place improvements within the areas which require
protection.
F. Safety Element
The following goals, policies and implementation measures may be found
at pp. 10-18, et seq.
Goal 10-E. To minimize the risk of loss of life or injury due to
landslides,both ordinary and seismically-induced.
Goal 10-F. To reduce economic losses and social disruption from
landslides,both ordinary and seismically-induced.
Policy 10-22. Slope stability shall be a primary consideration in the
ability of land to be developed for urban uses.
Policy 10-23. Slope stability shall be given careful scrutiny in the design
of developments and structures, and in the adoption of
conditions of approval and required mitigation measures.
VII. Applicable Subdivision Ordinance Requirements
The following Subdivision Ordinance improvement, design, and procedure
standards apply to the Project.
A. Sidewalks — Provision of a Portland cement concrete sidewalk along all
streets wherein the area is zoned R-12 or in land use districts having a
higher density. (Ord. Code § 96-8.402(3))
The Project Site is zoned R-10, which allows for a smaller parcel size
(min. 10,000 square feet) than is allowed in the R-12 zoning district (min.
12,000 square feet). Therefore, the Project Site is in a land use district
having a higher density than the R-12 zoning district, and the Project is
required to provide for sidewalks along its streets.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-10
B. Underground Utilities — Provision for the undergrounding of utilities on
any existing public streets abutting the subdivision. (Ord. Code § 96-
10.002, et seq.)
Boulevard Way and Warren Road are County-maintained streets.
Therefore,the Subdivider is responsible for compliance with this
requirement.
C. Curbs and Gutters — Curbs are required when the subdivision is within an
R-20 district or a district having a smaller lot size. (Ord. Code § 96-
12.202(1))
The minimum parcel size for the R-20 district is 20,000 square feet. The
minimum parcel size for the zoning district that applies to the Project Site
is 10,000 square feet. Therefore, the Project Site has zoning that requires
a smaller parcel size, and the Subdivision Ordinance requires the Project
to provide curbs.
D. Frontage Improvements—Frontage improvements shall be provided on all
existing county streets adjacent to any subdivision to the standards
required by Title 9 and the adopted County General Plan. The Subdivider
will be required to provide frontage improvements and pavement
widening on the side or sides of the roadway adjacent to the subdivision,
including the adjustments of all existing public utilities owned and
operated by public jurisdictions. (Ord. Code § 96-14.002)
Warren Road and Boulevard Way are County streets adjacent to the
Project. Therefore, the Subdivider is required by the Subdivision
Ordinance to provide frontage improvements and pavement widening
along the sides of Warren Road and Boulevard Way that adjoin the
Project.
E. Drainage DWrovements—All surface waters flowing from the subdivision
in any form or manner shall be collected and conveyed without diversion
or damage to any improvement, building or dwelling to a natural
watercourse having a defined bed and banks, or to an existing public storm
drainage facility having adequate capacity to its point of discharge into a
natural watercourse.... (Ord. Code § 914-2.004(a))
All surface waters occurring within the subdivision, as well as all surface
waters flowing into and/or through the subdivision shall be collected and
conveyed through the subdivision without damage to any improvement,
building site or dwelling which may be constructed within the subdivision.
(Ord. Code § 914-2.002(b))
i
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-11
Based on the foregoing provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance, the
Subdivider is responsible for collecting and conveying all surface waters
occurring within the subdivision, as well as all surface waters flowing into
and/or through the subdivision, to a natural watercourse having a definable
bed and banks, or to an existing public storm drainage facility having
adequate capacity to its point of discharge in a natural watercourse.
If the Subdivider intends to use these facilities as part of the on-site
drainage system to comply with the "collect and convey" requirement of
the Subdivision Ordinance, the Subdivider will be required to either verify
the adequacy of this storm drain (both hydraulically and structurally), or
remove and reconstruct the facilities, to satisfy the County standards and
specifications.
F. Structure Setback Lines for Unimproved Earth Channels — The
Subdivision Ordinance requires that subdivisions provide for a structure
setback to be observed for unimproved earth channels within a subdivision
where no development is to be permitted. The extent of the structure
setback is based on formulae contained in the Ordinance that take into
account the depth and width of the creek bed. The Subdivision Ordinance
also provides that the development rights for that portion of the lot on the
creek side of the setback line, which is defined as the "structure setback
area, " shall be offered for dedication to Contra Costa County by separate
instrument. (Ord. Code § 914-14.012)
A portion of the Las Trampas Creek earth channel lies within and
immediately adjacent to the Project Site. Therefore,the Subdivision
Ordinance requires a structure setback area that would limit development
of the Project Site.
G. Maintenance of Private Drainage Systems - The Subdivision Ordinance
provides that the Subdivider shall be responsible for the maintenance of
slope intercept ditches, yard drains and other similar drainage systems.
(Ord. Code § 914-14.020)
The Subdivider for the Project will be responsible for the maintenance of
private drainage systems associated with the Project.
H. Requests for Exceptions— The Subdivision Ordinance allows a subdivider
to submit a written request for exceptions to street improvements, widths,
grades and other subdivision matters or variances from zoning
requirements, subject to the approval of the advisory agency. (Ord. Code
§ 94-2.608)
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File 4MS03-0015
Page F-12
No written requests for exceptions to the standards of the Subdivision
Ordinance were indicated on the Tentative Map or otherwise accompanied
the Tentative Map application for the Project, including any requests for
exceptions to frontage or drainage improvements.
VIII. Protect Findings Re: Ordinance Code and State Law
Requirements
Contra Costa County Ordinance Code Section 26-2.2202 assigns to the
Project Applicant the burden of producing evidence to convince the Planning
Agency hearing the matter that all standards are met and the intent and
purpose of the applicable regulations and goals and objectives of the General
Plan will be satisfied. Failure to satisfy this burden shall result in a denial.
Based on evidence and testimony submitted to the Board of Supervisors, the
Board finds that the proposed subdivision, as conditioned by the January 25,
2005 Conditions of Approval, meets all standards and that the intent and
purpose of the applicable regulations and goals and objectives of the General
Plan will be satisfied. However, this Board determines that the Subdivider has
not met its burden of proof with respect to the matter set forth in its Notice of
Appeal of February 3, 2005. Specifically, the Subdivider has failed to
convince this Board that the Project will satisfy the necessary findings that are
required by law could be made if the conditions of approval challenged in the
Notice of Appeal were eliminated as conditions for this Project.
Pursuant to Section 26-2.2412 of the Contra Costa County Ordinance Code,
the Board of Supervisors shall render its decision on the appeal as provided in
Chapter 3 (Gov. C. §§ 66451 ff.) of the Subdivision Map Act. The decision
shall comply with the provisions in the Subdivision Map Act and in particular
Government Code Sections 66473, 66473.5 and 66474, and shall include any
findings required by said Act.
The appeal contests the subdivision permit conditions requiring the
construction of specific improvements, including the creek bank stabilization
wall and frontage requirements along Boulevard Way. Without these
improvements, the Subdivision Map Act and County Ordinance Findings
cannot be made and a disapproval of the tentative map would be required.
(Gov. Code § 66473)
After reviewing all of the evidence and testimony submitted on this matter,
the Board of Supervisors finds as follows:
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-13
A. Finding for Compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA)
For purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA), staff conducted an initial study of the project for purposes of
determining whether the project would result in a significant
environmental impact. After reviewing the project, staff determined that
project might result in significant impacts to biological resources, and
impacts associated with geologic and soil Project Site conditions.
However, staff identified measures that would mitigate those impacts to a
less than significant level, and the Subdivider agreed to those mitigation
measures.
As a result of the Subdivider agreeing to the measures identified by staff,
staff concluded that the Project would not result in any significant effects
to the environment. On December 29, 2003, the Community
Development Department posted and issued a Notice of Public Review
and Intent to Adopt a Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
Project as required by law for the purpose of satisfying the review
requirement of CEQA, and allowed for public comment under the required
public comment period.
Finding-
Reguired —Prior to approving a project, the Board of Supervisors
shall consider the proposed mitigated negative declaration together with
any comments received during the public review process. The Board shall
adopt the proposed mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the
basis of the whole record before it ("including the initial study and any
comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project
will have a significant effect on the environment and that the mitigated
negative declaration reflects the Board's independent judgment and
analysis. (State and County CEQA Guidelines§15074)
Project Finding — This Board finds that it has considered the proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration that was issued for this project,, together
with the comments received during the public review process; that on the
basis of the whole record before the Board (including the initial study and
the comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the
Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the County's independent
judgment and analysis.
The Board also finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and related
material constituting the record of proceedings may be found at the
Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,Martinez, CA.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-14
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the Board;
County General Plan.
B. Findings Pertaining to Approval of a Tentative Map (C.C.C. Ord.
Code §94-2.806; Gov. Code Section 66473.5)
Finding: r"If
Required.rn7. : i ne advisory agency shall not approve a tentative map
unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision, together with the
provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the
applicable general and specific plans required by law. When approving
the tentative map for a minor subdivision, the advisory agency shall make
findings as required concerning the fulfillment of construction
requirements.
Project, Finding. This nis Board finds the proposed subdivision, together with
the provisions for its design and improvement, is consistent with the
General Plan. Specifically, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the
Single-Family Medium (SM) and Open Space (OS) General Plan land use
designations, and with the goals, policies and implementation measures
presented in Section VI (Relevant General Plan Goals, Policies and
Implementation Measures) of this report.
The Project as conditioned also satisfies the Performance Standards of the
Growth Management Element of the General Plan in the manner outlined
below:
The Project is required to assure. frontage improvements to
Boulevard Way, and the Subdivider must enter into a deferred
improvement agreement for frontage improvements to Warren
Road.
• The Project is required to satisfy the Subdivision Ordinance
requirements for collecting and conveying storm water runoff to an
adequate natural or man-made watercourse.
• The Project is required to observe a structure setback area from
unimproved Las Trampas Creek. The Subdivider may be able to
reduce the structure setback area that would normally be required
for a subdivision on this Project if he is able to provide
documentation and improvements to the County's satisfaction to
reduce the hazards associated with the natural forces of Las
Trampas Creek by provision or assurance of creek bank
stabilization measures prior to filing a Parcel Map.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-1 S
• The Project also requires the Subdivider to record a Statement of
Obligation in the form of a deed notification that states that the
Subdivider and future property owners will hold harmless the
County and Flood Control District due to the fact that an exception
to the creek structure setback area was requested and granted. The
intent of this condition and notice is to insure that the owner and
future owners are aware that, when constructed,, the intermittent
retaining wall exists to provide a measure of stability for the
property in the event of creek bank failure or erosion damage due
to the creek.
The road improvements to Boulevard Way required by the permit
are consistent with the proposed Revised Precise Alignment Plan
for Boulevard Way.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the Board-,
County General Plan.
C. Required Findings for Approval of an Exception to the Requirements
of Title 9 (C.C.C. Ord. Code §92-6.002)
The tentative map application filed with the Community Development
Department did not include a written request for exceptions to any
subdivision standards. (CCC Ord. Code § 94-2.608) Still, this Board
finds that Ordinance Code findings for granting exceptions to Subdivision
Ordinance creek structure setback standards can be made as outlined
below:
1. Required Finding: That there are unusual circumstances or
conditions affecting the property.
Protect Finding: This Board finds as follows with respect to (A)
proposed exceptions to required frontage improvements for
Warren Road and Boulevard Way and (B) an exception to the
creek structure setback area:
A. Required Frontage Improvements for Warren Road and
Boulevard Way
1) Boulevard - This Board finds no unusual
circumstance that would warrant granting an exception
to the Boulevard Way frontage improvement
requirement. On February 23, 2004, the County
required that another subdivision project fronting on
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor-Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
• Page F-16
Boulevard Way (File #MS030018, #1367 Boulevard
Way, Liu) comply with the Subdivision Ordinance
frontage improvement requirement for its Boulevard
Way frontage without exception.
On July 21, 2003, the County granted an exception to
fhe frontage 'mnrovement requirement for a third
subdivision that fronts on Boulevard Way due to
unusual circumstances (File #MS02-0007, Rickart,
#1384 Boulevard Way). The Rickart Subdivision is
located on the inside curvature of a major bend in the
alignment of Boulevard Way. County staff is in the
process of revising the Precise Alignment Plan for
Boulevard Way along this section of the road that
would reduce its ultimate overall width. The
modification would also provide for channelization
improvements at the Kinney Drive intersection. In light
of the magnitude of the major changes associated with
the new design within that section of Boulevard Way
and the need for interim pavement widening and
transitions along the property to accommodate the
future road alignment, the County granted that project 2s-a--
,=
exception to the frontage i ovement requirement,
subject to the Subdivider executing into a deferred
improvement agreement. This Board finds that no such
unusual circumstances apply to the Project Site that
would warrant granting an exception to the Subdivsion
Ordinance frontage improvement requirement for
Boulevard Way.
2) Warren Road — This Board finds that there are no
unusual circumstances affecting this property that
would warrant granting an exception to the frontage
improvement requirement. However, in approving the
Project, the County has allowed deferral of the required
frontage and sidewalk improvements subject to the
Subdivider executing a Deferred Improvement
Agreement with the County at time of filing a Parcel
Map to assure that the improvements will be
constructed by the Subdivider or future property owner
at some time in the future when the County deems it
appropriate.
B. Creek Structure Setback — Based on proposed creek bank
stabilitzation measures (intermittent retaining wall), the
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-17
Subdivider has shown that it may be feasible to assure a
significant reduction in the creek bank failure hazard that
would otherwise affect a major portion of the project site,
subject to further analysis, documentation, and review by staff
prior to filing of a parcel map. If adequate documentation is
provided and determined to be acceptable by County staff, the
County permit would authorize an exception to the Ordinance
Code design standard for a substantial reduction in the creek
bank structure setback area.
Even if documentation is provided to support a reduction in the
creek bank structure setback area, the County permit still
requires provision of a 20-foot structure setback from the
retaining wall, and grant deeding of development rights to the
County for this area. This restriction is intended to provide an
additional margin of safety, and was proposed by the
Subdivider.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
2. Reauired Finding: That the exception is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant.
ProjectFinding: This Board finds that granting of an exception for
the creek bank structure setback, as conditioned in the permit, is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the Subdivider. An exception to the creek bank
structure setback area is appropriate if the Subdivider were able to
demonstrate that construction of an appropriately designed
intermittent retaining wall meeting the County's specifications and
standards would substantially reduce the hazards of a creek bank
failure.
This Board finds that granting of exceptions to the Subdivision
Ordinance requirements for constructing frontage improvements
along Boulevard Way and Warren Road is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
Subdivider.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-18
3. Required Findi That the granting of the exception will not be
materially detrimental to the public we fare or injurious to other
property in the territory in which the property is situated
Project Finding: This Board finds that granting of an exception to
the creek structure setback standard will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in
the territory in which the property is situated provided that the
conditions providing for an appropriately designed soldier pile
retaining wall and other related conditions included in the January
25, 2005 Conditions of Approval are met. Allowing a reduction in
the creek bank structure setback will not injure the public or other
properties if the Subdivider is able to show County staff that a
properly designed wall could reduce the hazards of a complete
creek bank failure in this area,, and assure its construction prior to
filing a Parcel Map.
This Board finds that granting of exceptions to the Subdivision
Ordinance requirements for constructing frontage improvements
along Boulevard Way and Warren Road would not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in
the territory in which the property is situated.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
In view of the foregoing, this Board finds that none of the necessary
ordinance findings for granting exceptions to the Subdivision Ordinance
requirement for construction of frontage improvements along Boulevard
Way or Warren Road can be made.
D. Required Findings for Granting of a Variance to the Zoning
Requirements (C.C.C. Ord. Code §26-2.2006)
1. Required Fi : That any variance authorized shall not
constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations on other properties in the vicinity and the respective
land use district in which the subject property is located.
Project Finding: This Board finds that the construction of a buried
retaining wall within the rear and side yards will not constitute a
grant of special privilege. Construction of the wall is required in
order to grant an exception to the creek structure setback
requirements. Without the wall the Tentative Map could not be
approved.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-19
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
2. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances
applicable to the subject property because of its size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the
respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject
property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and
within the identical land use district.
Project Finding: This Board finds that there are special
circumstances applicable to the subject property and that strict
application of the respective zoning regulation would deprive the
subject property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity. The proposed wall will be buried and thus not affect air
or light of adjoining properties. The wall may reduce the hazard of
a complete bank failure associated with the presence of Las
Trampas Creek. With provision of a safe wall that stabilizes the
Project Site, the Subdivider should be able to use the Project Site
much as other owners are able to use portions of their properties
where there are no identified specific hazards.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall
substantially meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use
district in which the subject property is located.
Project Finding: This Board finds that authorization of the variance
shall substantially meet the intent and purpose of the R-10 land use
district. The granting of a variance to allow a subterranean wall to
be constructed within required side and rear yards may remove a
hazard that is otherwise present on the property. The R-10 district
allows for development of single-family residences on parcels as
small as 10,000 square feet in area, subject to various design
standards. To the extent that the hazard can be reduced, the
Subdivider should be able to use his property much as other R-10
properties that are not affected by creek hazards.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
E. General Plan Growth Management Performance Standards
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-21
Required Finding — The County, pursuant to its police power and
as the proper governmental entity responsible for directly
regulating land use density or intensity, property development and
the subdivision of property within the unincorporated areas of the
County, shall require new development to demonstrate that
adequate water quantity and quality can be provided. At the
project approval stage (subdivision map, land use permit, etc), the
County may consult with the appropriate water agency. The
County, based on information furnished or available to it from
consultations with the appropriate water agency, the applicant or
other sources, should determine whether (1) capacity exists with
the water system is f a development project is built within a set
period of time, or (2) capacity will be provided by a funded
program or other mechanism....
Project Finding - This Board finds that the Project satisfies the
Water performance standard. The Project site lies within the East
Bay Municipal Utility District. At time of issuance of building
permits for new residences, the residences will be required to
provide water service connections to the District's community
water supply system.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
3. Sanitary Sewer
Required Finding— The County,pursuant to its police power and s
the proper governmental entity responsible for directly regulating
land use density or intensity, property development and the
subdivision of property within the unincorporated areas of the
County, shall require new development to demonstrate that
adequate sanitary sewer quantity and quality can be provided. At
the project approval stage (subdivision map, land use permit, etc),
the County may consult with the appropriate sewer agency. The
County, based on information furnished or available to it from
consultations with the appropriate sewer agency, the applicant or
other sources, should determine whether (1) capacity exists within
the sewer system if the development project is built within a set
period of time, or (2) capacity will be provided by a funded
program or other mechanism....
Project Finding — This Board finds that the Project satisfies the
Sanitary Sewer performance standard. The Project Site lies within
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-22
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, and will be required to
connect to the District's community sewerage system at time of
issuance of building permits.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
4. Fire Protection
Required Finding — Fire stations shall be located within one and
one-half miles of developments in urban, suburban and central
business district areas. Automatic fire sprinklers may be used to
satisfy this standard.
Project Finding - This Board finds that the site lies within the
service area of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District,
and the District would provide that fire protection service for the
Proj ect.
Figure 4-2 of the General Plan shows the Level of Service
Designations for Unincorporated Areas. This figure shows the
Project Site within an area designated for Urban Level of Service.
A District fire station is located one mile to the south of the Project
at 20 Rossmoor Parkway, Walnut Creek. Because the distance
between the Project Site and the fire station is less than 1 V2 miles,
this Board finds that the Project is consistent with the Fire
Protection performance standard, and no automatic sprinklers are
required for the Project in order to satisfy the Fire Protection
performance standard.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
5. Public Protection
Required Finding—A Sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of
station area and support facilities per 1,000 population shall be
maintained within the unincorporated area of the County.
Project Finding - This Board finds that the project will not trigger
the need for additional police protection. The Growth Management
Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff facility station per
7 Pg.4-6 of the General Plan.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-23
1,000 population. The Project will result in an addition of two
residences that will increase the population, but by fewer than
1000 people.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
6. Parks & Recreation
Required Finding — Neighborhood Parks: 3 acres required per
15000 population.
Project Finding - This Board finds that the Project will satisfy the
Parks and Recreation performance standard. The subdivision
permit conditions (COA #S) requires that prior to issuance of
building permits, the developer pay an in-lieu park dedication fee
in the amount of $2,000 per new residential unit. The park
dedication fees are used for acquisition and capital improvements
to public parks in the area. The fee charge is in accord with the in-
lieu fee provided for in the Park Dedications Ordinance, which is
based on the park and recreation standard of three acres of
neighborhood park required per 1,000 population. (CCC Ord.
Code § 920-6.206)
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
7. Drainage and Flood Control
Required Finding—Require major new development to finance the
full costs of drainage improvements necessary to accommodate
peak flows due to the project. Limit development within the 100-
year flood plain until a flood management plan has been adopted
and implementation is assured. For mainland areas along rivers
and bays, it must be demonstrated that adequate protection exists
through levee protection or change of elevation prior to
development. Development shall not be allowed in flood prone
areas designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) until a risk assessment and other technical studies have
been performed.
Project Finding
A. Drainage - This Board finds that the Project, as conditioned
by the January 25, 2005 Conditions of Approval, will not
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-24
have an adverse effect on the drainage patterns within the
vicinity. The subdivision permit requires that the
Subdivider provide drainage improvements to safely handle
storm water runoff that flows onto the Project Site and
would be generated by the Project to an adequate natural or
man-made watercourse in a safe manner in accordance with
the requirements of the County Subdivision Ordinance.
The County may grant an exception to the creek structure
setback area requirement, but otherwise the subdivision has
not been granted any exceptions to the Subdivision
Ordinance drainage requirements. The Subdivider and
future property owners will be required to maintain on-site
drainage and creek bank stabilization improvements, and
the permit requires that deed notification of this
responsibility be recorded with the Parcel Map.
B. Flood Control - A small portion of the site lies within a
100-year flood hazard zone (Flood Zone "A") as designated
by FEMA.
Any proposed development within this Flood Zone would
be subject to the regulations of the Floodplain Management
Ordinance (Chapter 82-28 of Title 8) to assure that
development will be safe from flood hazard conditions.
Accordingly, this Board finds that the portion of the site
that is designated Flood Zone "A" and subject to a 100-year
flood plain is appropriately regulated by the Floodplain
Management Ordinance.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
F. Findings Pertaining to State Map Act Limitations on Improvement
Requirements Under a Parcel Map (Gov. Code § 66411.1(b))
Required Finding - Notwithstanding Section 66428 of the Government
Code, fulfillment of the construction requirements shall not be required
until the time a permit or other grant of approval for development of the
parcel is issued by the County or, where provided by County ordinances,
until the time the construction of the improvements is required pursuant to
an agreement between the subdivider and the County, except that in the
absence of an agreement, the County may require fulfillment of the
construction requirements within a reasonable time following approval of
the parcel map and prior to the issuance of a permit or other grant of
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-25
approval for the development of a parcel upon a finding by the County
that fulfillment of the construction requirements is necessary for either of
the following reasons:
(1) The public health and safety;
(2) The required construction is a necessary prerequisite to the
orderly development of the surrounding area.
Construction Requirements of the Project and Related Information — The
Project is required to satisfy the following construction requirements.
1. Drainage improvements to satisfy the Subdivision Ordinance
"co ect and convey"requirement.
2. Creekside Intermittent Retaining Wall to allow for the granting of
an exception to the creek structure setback Subdivision Ordinance
requirement.
3. Subdivision frontage improvements (Road Widening,
Undergrounding of Utilities, Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk)
a) Boulevard Way
b) Warren Road
The Subdivision Ordinance requires the Parcel Map for the Project to be
accompanied by a subdivision agreement to be executed by the Subdivider
or his agent guaranteeing the construction of improvements required by
the County Code and reviewed plans within a specified time, and payment
therefore. (CCC Ord. Code § 94-4.402, et seq.) For the Project, as
conditioned by the January 25, 2005 Conditions of Approval, the
subdivision improvements that will be covered by the Subdivision
Agreement include:
• The drainage improvements to satisfy the Subdivision Ordinance
"collect and convey"requirement; and
• The Boulevard Way frontage improvements.
The precise location and design of the Intermittent Retaining Wali cannot
be determined with the information supplied to date by the Subdivider.
The County Geologist recommends that the piers supporting the wall be
drilled to a minimum depth of 20-feet, but the actual depth and spacing of
piers will be dependent upon the geological information that will be
required of the applicant prior to construction of the wall.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-26
Parcel A contains an existing residence that is not proposed to be removed
by the Project and is the only proposed parcel within the Project that fronts
on Warren Road.
Project Findings for Fulfillment of Construction Requirements
A. Creekside Intermittent Retaining Wall - This Board finds that
requiring fulfillment of the creekside Intermittent Retaining Wall
construction requirements prior to issuance of any building permits
within the subdivision is necessary for protection of public health
and safety:
• Construction of the wall will require heavy equipment
over an extended period of time. To minimize hazards
to residents associated with the operation of this
construction equipment, the wall should be built prior
to construction and occupancy of any new residences.
This Board finds that requiring fulfillment of the creekside
Intermittent Retaining Wall construction requirements prior to
issuance of any building permits within the subdivision is a
necessary prerequisite to the orderly development of the
surrounding area:
• The construction of the wall is needed to allow
development of both Parcels B and C.
• It is possible that the wall that the County would
ultimately require may extend onto Parcel B as well as
Parcel C. Allowing the wall to be built in increments
would be disruptive to the owners and residents of the
affected parcels, and ultimately more costly to
complete.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
B. Warren Road Frontage Improvements — This Board finds that
fulfillment of the Warren Road frontage improvement construction
requirements prior to issuance of a building permit on Parcel A for
protection of public health and safety due to the following factors:
• The Roadway Network Plan designates Warren Road as
an Existing Collector. The site is within an area that is
subject to growth and development that will lead to
increased traffic within the area including Warren Road
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-27
that will eventually cause hazardous conditions to
vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
• Parcel A contains an existing residence that the Project
does not propose to remove. Because there is an
existing residence on this parcel, it is possible that no
residential permit may be sought on the parcel for an
indefinite period of time. Unless the County issues a
residential permit or other grant of approval for
development of the parcel, the existing semi-rural
frontage conditions without curb, gutter or sidewalk, or
pavement widening may remain in its undeveloped
condition and allow more hazardous conditions to
develop near a major community intersection of an
Arterial and Collector road. In the absence of a
mechanism to empower the County to mitigate road
conditions, there may be no assurance that the planned
road improvements would be constructed in a timely
manner, when the County determined that they were
needed.
• Allowing the County to require the future owner of
Parcel A to install the frontage improvements at a
future date when the County determined that such
improvements would mitigate a hazardous road
condition along Warren Road, and thus avoid a
potential risk to the future risk to public health and
safety of the local community.
Thus, this Board finds that requiring the Subdivider to execute a
deferred improvement agreement prior to approval of a Parcel
Map, to empower the County to be able to require at a future date
that the future owner of Parcel A construct frontage improvements
along Warren Road that are required by the Subdivision Ordinance
for this Project, prior to issuance of a permit by the County for that
parcel, would assure the protection of public health and safety
conditions along Warren Road.
This Board finds that fulfillment of the Warren Road frontage
improvement construction requirements prior to issuance of a
building permit on Parcel A is a necessary prerequisite to the
orderly development of the surrounding area based on the
following factors:
off° ►'"''�+
a �
a Cr -
�=
AV _
€_
i -
t Shaw/Ryan residence
Lionsgate positioning pipe
Three quarters distance across their
n - Q Parcel towards Shaw/Ryan residence
Looking South/East
f
r
1
t
r r�
x
r
a
r W'
w
r Ri
.4
,
+ o
ay `
- a r
.t
dJ _,
- — J
L
146,
r
' E E 4
Oki
�_!.�`. .� `Awa t. ���4 r•d\-�t OF
At
� �` •�• _-.;♦. ._ •r ` J' �
a �t pipe :e e
�:' �.'•• = pipe
�d
. r
r•
r.
IA)oking South
�
Comer of Boulevard ' 1 e Waffen Re
JOr ♦+j
[ice- - F__`4 ♦ - '�z
i
- --e tom' _ - .♦ - - _
,
i
4
A ,
r
1 140
4 t
- R .. r _ t� r�j,�►�s -ice _- _ i.-•L '.� � . -
_`'�f �s e� - ear S f t�-.-�"y'�'•�1 + �• � - - � • ,
- � s} � • � ',. /ice/ i,�- �• �r�
End of 1 ! asbestos pi
ipe - �•''
which discharges East tow
[ l
'ladder in photograph
- -
.N
•- i
s
lot
Of •
•
Of
IL
` t2
i�b t ..
-� _ _'. I _- ♦ilii - _- .
jig
t
1. ' .•
i
.� AtIk
}-
i 1 1
1 1 1 f
-? — wo_ -low
-.
El
�. 1 � t 1 •1 �• � `�-�' ad,
HT
_ Ik _
A FIG = t
s140 = _
A Ir
R
Oka
1 • westfromeastbank1Las Trampas Creek
�%
r� 3
et
jp� ,
0 41
L•' �E
• � c s
t
�� - _ , ����4 �,!!- -i� �-1. 4- - ��.�� � •/�-j a .z.� g i,
� t
Aft
41
•
a
r
zn� s
�' :. '� ,. y a+��.,��w✓ „�yds'�`$r3"�'� y�"�:a".-,+�'t � � z W�^^°.
y aAP4 c
4?
a �
,f
s w°
Looking North Jan. 1, 1997
ti
a
r
t
r,
r
dr
a
Looking North Jan.2, 1907
16 4.4
410
600
CA
co
0
tp
(510
610
lo =.
06cpm
WIAJ
PC.)
LICA-
4=4
i 0VOW
coo
vollo "W
*40%
o
4000
=w
00
W16
GI
p o t'' `� 2
VIA
C.� �
N►
9-0
03
A
t4j
RECEIVED
FAR 01 20051
---------------------- at 611cl ORS
CONTRA COSTA 1.0
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Aw--
W 651 Pine Street, N. Wing = 4th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553
Telephone: (925) 335=1210 Fax: (925) 335=1222
. .............
------------ --------
------------- ---------- - ---------------N -
TO: Jane Pennington, Chief Clerk
Clerk of the Board
FROM: Bob Drake
Principal Pl e
DATE: April 5, 2005
SUBJECT: Modified Findings per
April 5, 2005 Board of Supervisors Approval
Lionsgate Appeal of County Planning Commission Approval
Minor Subdivision File#MS03-0015, Agenda Item #D.2
Walnut Creek/Saranap area
The Board of Supervisors conducted a continued hearing on April 5, 2005 on the above
captioned appeal. The staff report included recommended findings,for Board adoption with
respect to the Board action on the appeal.
At the time of the hearing, staff identified modifications to Page F-16 of the recommended
findings. After taking testimony, the Board closed the hearing and adopted the
recommended findings including the modifications read into the record at the hearing, and
took other actions recommended by staff on the appeal.
Modified Findings
We have modified the findings to reflect the changes proposed by staff at the April 5, 2005
hearing. In addition to altering Page F-16, added text has also affected the pagination of
subsequent pages.
2
Accordingly, we are attaching Pages F-16 through F-29 (only) of the revised findings
adopted by the Board. Please include these findings in the final Board Order for this project.
0
Should you have any questions, please call me at X5-1214.
Att. Revised Findings (excerpt)
Cc: Ruben Hernandez,Community Development Dept.
Eric Whan,Public Works Dept.
File
\\fs-cd\users$\bdrake\Personal\ms03-OO15.mem.doc
RM
Excerpt
(P916 F- 16 thru F-29)
Modified Findings
Lionsg�ate MinorubdSivision
File #MS03-0015
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-16
Boulevard Way (File #MS030018, #1367 Boulevard
Way, Liu) comply with the Subdivision Ordinance
frontage improvement requirement for its Boulevard
Way frontage without exception.
On July 21, 2003, the County allowed the applicant to
enter into a deferred improvement agreement for the
frontage improvement requirement for a third
subdivision that fronts on Boulevard Way due to
unusual circumstances (File #MS02-0007, Rickart,
#1384 Boulevard Way). The Rickart Subdivision is
located on the inside curvature of a major bend in the
alignment of Boulevard Way. County staff is in the
process of revising the Precise Alignment Plan for
Boulevard Way along this section of the road that
would reduce its ultimate overall width. The
modification would also provide for channelization
improvements at the Kinney Drive intersection. In light
of the magnitude of the ma j or changes associated with
the new design within that section of Boulevard Way
and the need for interim pavement widening and
transitions along the property to accommodate the
future road alignment, the County allowed the applicant
to enter into a deferred improvement agreement for the
frontage improvement requirement, subject to the
Subdivider executing into a deferred improvement
agreement. This Board finds that no such unusual
circumstances apply to the Project Site that would
warrant granting an exception to the Subdivsion
Ordinance frontage improvement requirement for
Boulevard Way.
2) Warren Road — This Board finds that there are no
unusual circumstances affecting this property that
would warrant granting an exception to the frontage
improvement requirement. However, in approving the
Project, the County has allowed deferral of the required
frontage and sidewalk improvements subject to the
Subdivider executing a Deferred Improvement
Agreement with the County at time of filing a Parcel
Map to assure that the improvements will be
constructed by the Subdivider or future property owner
at some time in the future when the County deems it
appropriate.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-17
B. Creek Structure Setback — Based on proposed creek bank
stabilitzation measures (intermittent retaining wall), the
Subdivider has shown that it may be feasible to assure a
significant reduction in the creek bank failure hazard that
would otherwise affect a major portion of the project site,
subject to further analysis, documentation, and review by staff
prior to filing of a parcel map. If adequate documentation is
provided and determined to be acceptable by County staff, the
County permit would authorize an exception to the Ordinance
Code design standard for a substantial reduction in the creek
bank structure setback area.
Even if documentation is provided to support a reduction in the
creek bank structure setback area, the County permit still
requires provision of a 20-foot structure setback from the
retaining wall, and grant deeding of development rights -to the
County for this area. This restriction is intended to provide an
additional margin of safety, and was proposed by the
Subdivider.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
2. Required Finding: That the exception is necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
applicant.
Project Finding: This Board finds that granting of an exception for
the creek bank structure setback, as conditioned in the permit, is
necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial
property right of the Subdivider. An exception to the creek bank
structure setback area is appropriate if the Subdivider were able to
demonstrate that construction of an appropriately designed
intermittent retaining wall meeting the County's specifications and
standards would substantially reduce the hazards of a creek bank
failure.
This Board finds that granting of exceptions to the Subdivision
Ordinance requirements for constructing frontage improvements
along Boulevard Way and Warren Road is not necessary for the
preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the
Subdivider.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-18
3. Required Finding: That the granting of the exception will not be
materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other
property in the territory in which the property is situated.
ProjectFinding: This Board finds that granting of an exception to
the creek structure setback standard will not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in
the territory in which the property is situated provided that the
conditions providing for an appropriately designed soldier pile
retaining wall and other related conditions included in the January
25, 2005 Conditions of Approval are met. Allowing a reduction in
the creek bank structure setback will not injure the public or other
properties if the Subdivider is able to show County staff that a
properly designed wall could reduce the hazards of a complete
creek bank failure in this area,, and assure its construction prior to
filing a Parcel Map.
This Board finds that granting of exceptions to the Subdivision
Ordinance requirements for constructing frontage improvements
along Boulevard Way and Warren Road would not be materially
detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to other property in
the territory in which the property is situated.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
In view of the foregoing, this Board finds that none of the necessary
ordinance findings for granting exceptions to the Subdivision Ordinance
requirement for construction of frontage improvements along Boulevard
Way or Warren Road can be made.
D. Required Findings for Granting of a Variance to the Zoning
Requirements (C.C.C. Ord. Code § 26-2.2006)
1. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall not
constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the
limitations on other properties in the vicinity and the respective
land use district in which the subject property is located.
ProjectFinding: This Board finds that the construction of a buried
retaining wall within the rear and side yards will not constitute a
grant of special privilege. Construction of the wall is required in
order to grant an exception to the creek structure setback
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-19
requirements. Without the wall the Tentative Map could not be
approved.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
2. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances
applicable to the subject property because of its size, shape,
topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the
respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject
property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and
within the identical land use district.
Project Finding: This Board finds that there are special
circumstances applicable to the subject property and that strict
application of the respective zoning regulation would deprive the
subj ect property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the
vicinity. The proposed wall will be buried and thus not affect air
or light of adjoining properties. The wall may reduce the hazard of
a complete bank failure associated with the presence of Las
Trampas Creek. With provision of a safe wall that stabilizes the
Proj ect Site, the Subdivider should be able to use the Project Site
much as other owners are able to use portions of their properties
where there are no identified specific hazards.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall
substantially meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use
district in which the subject properly is located.
Project Finding: This Board finds that authorization of the variance
shall substantially meet the intent and purpose of the R-10 land use
district. The granting of a variance to allow a subterranean wall to
be constructed within required side and rear yards may remove a
hazard that is otherwise present on the property. The R-10 district
allows for development of single-family residences on parcels as
small as 10,000 square feet in area, subject to various design
standards. To the extent that the hazard can be reduced, the
Subdivider should be able to use his property much as other R-10
properties that are not affected by creek hazards.
Evidence: Testimony and evidence presented in hearing before the
Board; County General Plan.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-20
E. General Plan Growth Management Performance Standards
The performance standards that are described below may be found on pp.
4-3, et seq. of the General Plan.
1. Traffic
Required Finding—LOS(Level of Service) traffic standards will be
considered to be met if:
• Measurement of actual conditions at the intersection
indicates that operations are equivalent to or better than
those specified in the standard, or
• The County has included projects in its adopted capital
improvements program which, when constructed, will
result in operations equal to or better than the standard....
The Traffic standard keyed to land use for Urban Areas is Peak
Hour of Level Service of high D (Volume/Capacity Ratio = 0.85 —
0.89).S
Project Finding - This Board finds that Project Site is located
within an Urban Level of Service designation.6 The Project would
result in three parcels, one of which already contains an existing
residence that is to remain. Therefore, the project would result in
two new residential units, and generate an estimated 2 additional
AM and PM peak hour trips per day.
Pursuant to the Bridge Crossings and Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance
requirements for the South Walnut Creek Area of Benefit, at time
of issuance of building permits for new residential units, the
developer shall be required to contribute fees for the purpose of
defraying the actual or estimated cost of constructing bridges and
or major/thoroughfares. (CCC Ord. Code § 913-4.202, et seq.)
Based on these factors, this Board finds that the Project satsifies
the Traffic performance standard.
Evidence — Evidence submitted at the Board hearing; County
General Plan
5 Table 4-1 on pg.4-4 of the General Plan.
6 Figure 4-2 on pg.4-6 of the General Plan.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-21
2. Water
Required Finding— The County, pursuant to its police power and
as the proper governmental entity responsible for directly
regulating land use density or intensity,property development and
the subdivision ofproperty within the unincorporated areas of the
County, shall require new development to demonstrate that
adequate water quantity and quality can be provided. At the
project approval stage (subdivision map, land use permit, etc.), the
County may consult with the appropriate water agency. The
County, based on information furnished or available to it from
consultations with the appropriate water agency-, the applicant or
other sources, should determine whether (1) capacity exists with
the water system is f a development project is built within a set
period of time, or (2) capacity will be provided by a funded
program or other mechanism...-
Project Finding - This Board finds that the Project satisfies the
Waterperfon-nance standard. The Project site lies within the East
Bay Municipal Utility District. At time of issuance of building
pen-nits for new residences, the residences will be required to
provide water service connections to the District's community
water supply system.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
3. Sanitary Sewer
I Finding-Required P ndinz— The County.,pursuant to its police power and s
the proper governmental entity responsible for directly regulating
land use density or intensity, property development and the
subdivision of property within the unincorporated areas of the
County, shall require new development to demonstrate that
adequate sanitary sewer quantity and quality can be provided. At
the project approval stage (subdivision map, land use permit, etc.),
the County may consult with the appropriate sewer agency. The
County, based on information furnished or available to it from
consultations with the appropriate sewer agency, the applicant or
other sources, should determine whether (1) capacity exists within
the sewer system if the development project is built within a set
period of time, or (2) capacity will be provided by a funded
program or other mechanism....
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File 4MS03-0015
Page F-22
ProjectFinding — This Board finds that the Project satisfies the
Sanitary Sewer performance standard. The Project Site lies within
the Central Contra Costa Sanitary District, and will be required to
connect to the District's community sewerage system at time of
issuance of building permits.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
4. Fire Protection
Required Fin — Fire stations shall be located within one and
one-half miles of developments in urban, suburban and central
business district areas. Automatic fire sprinklers may be used to
satisfy this standard.
Project Finding - This Board finds that the site lies within the
service area of the Contra Costa County Fire Protection District,
and the District would provide that fire protection service for the
Project.
Figure 4-2 of the General Plan shows the Level of Service
Designations for Unincorporated Areas.7 This figure shows the
Project Site within an area designated for Urban Level of Service.
A District fire station is located one mile to the south of the Project
at 20 Rossmoor Parkway, Walnut Creek. Because the distance
between the Project Site and the fire station is less than I V2 miles,
this Board finds that the Project is consistent with the Fire
Protection performance standard, and no automatic sprinklers are
required for the Project in order to satisfy the Fire Protection
performance standard.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
5. Public Protection
Required Fin —A sheriff facility standard of 155 square feet of
station area and support facilities Per 1,000 population shall be
maintained within the unincorporated area of the County.
7 Pg.4-6 of the General Plan.
i
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-23
Project Finding This Board finds that the project will not trigger
the need for additional police protection. The Growth Management
Element Standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff facility station per
1,000 population. The Project will result in an addition of two
residences that will increase the population, but by fewer than
1000 people.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
6. Parks & Recreation
Required Finding — Neighborhood Parks: 3 acres required per
1,000 population.
Project Finding - This Board finds that the Project will satisfy the
Parks and Recreation performance standard. The subdivision
permit conditions (COA #8) requires that prior to issuance of
building permits, the developer pay an in-lieu park dedication fee
in the amount of $2,000 per new residential unit. The park
dedication fees are used for acquisition and capital improvements
to public parks in the area. The fee charge is in accord with the in-
lieu fee provided for in the Park Dedications Ordinance, which is
based on the park and recreation standard of three acres of
neighborhood park required per 1,000 population. (CCC Ord.
Code § 920-6.206)
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
7. Drainage and Flood Control
Required Finding—Require major new development to finance the
full costs of drainage improvements necessary to accommodate
peak flows due to the project. Limit development within the 100-
year flood plain until a flood management plan has been adopted
and implementation is assured. For mainland areas along rivers
and bays, it must be demonstrated that adequate protection exists
through levee protection or change of elevation prior to
development. Development shall not be allowed in flood prone
areas designated by the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA) until a risk assessment and other technical studies have
been performed.
Project Finding
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-24
A. Drainage - This Board finds that the Project, as conditioned
by the January 25, 2005 Conditions of Approval, will not
have an adverse effect on the drainage patterns within the
vicinity. The subdivision permit requires that the
Subdivider provide drainage improvements to safely handle
storm water runoff that flows onto the Project Site and
would be generated by the Project to an adequate natural or
man-made watercourse in a safe manner in accordance with
the requirements of the County Subdivision Ordinance.
The County may grant an exception to the creek structure
setback area requirement, but otherwise the subdivision has
not been granted any exceptions to the Subdivision
Ordinance drainage requirements. The Subdivider and
future property owners will be required to maintain on-site
drainage and creek bank stabilization improvements, and
the permit requires that deed notification of this
responsibility be recorded with the Parcel Map.
B. Flood Control - A small portion of the site lies within a
100-year flood hazard zone (Flood Zone "A") as designated
by FEMA.
Any proposed development within this Flood Zone would
be subject to the regulations of the Floodplain Management
Ordinance (Chapter 82-28 of Title 8) to assure that
development will be safe from flood hazard conditions.
Accordingly, this Board finds that the portion of the site
that is designated Flood Zone "A" and subject to a 100-year
flood plain is appropriately regulated by the Floodplain
Management Ordinance.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
F. Findings Pertaining to State Map Act Limitations on Improvement
Requirements Under a Parcel Map (Gov. Code § 66411.1(b))
Required Finding - Notwithstanding Section 66428 of the Government
Code, fulfillment of the construction requirements shall not be required
until the time a permit or other grant of approval for development of the
parcel is issued by the County or, where provided by County ordinances,
until the time the construction of the improvements is required pursuant to
an agreement between the subdivider and the County, except that in the
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-0015
Page F-25
absence of an agreement, the County may require fulfillment of the
construction requirements within a reasonable time following approval of
the parcel map and prior to the issuance of a permit or other grant of
approval for the development of a parcel upon a finding by the County
that fulfillment of the construction requirements is necessary for either of
the following reasons:
(1) The public health and safety;
(2) The required construction is a necessary prerequisite to the
orderly development of the surrounding area.
Construction Requirements of the Project and Related Information — The
Project is required to satisfy the following construction requirements.
1. Drainage improvements to satisfy the Subdivision Ordinance
"collect and convey"requirement.
2. Creekside Intermittent Retaining Wall to allow for the granting of
an exception to the creek structure setback Subdivision Ordinance
requirement.
3. Subdivision frontage improvements (Road Widening,
Undergrounding of Utilities, Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk)
a) Boulevard Way
b) Warren Road
The Subdivision Ordinance requires the Parcel Map for the Project to be
accompanied by a subdivision agreement to be executed by the Subdivider
or his agent guaranteeing the construction of improvements required by
the County Code and reviewed plans within a specified time, and payment
therefore. (CCC Ord. Code § 94-4.402, et seq.) For the Project, as
conditioned by the January 25, 2005 Conditions of Approval, the
subdivision improvements that will be covered by the Subdivision
Agreement include:
0 The drainage improvements to satisfy the Subdivision Ordinance
"collect and convey"requirement; and
• The Boulevard Way frontage improvements.
The precise location and design of the Intermittent Retaining Wall cannot
be determined with the information supplied to date by the Subdivider.
The County Geologist recommends that the piers supporting the wall be
drilled to a minimum depth of 20-feet, but the actual depth and spacing of
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-26
piers will be dependent upon the geological information that will be
required of the applicant prior to construction of the wall.
Parcel A contains an existing residence that is not proposed to be removed
by the Project and is the only proposed parcel within the Project that fronts
on Warren Road.
Project Findings for Fulfillment of Construction Requirements
A. Creekside Intermittent Retaining Wall - This Board finds that
requiring fulfillment of the creekside Intermittent Retaining Wall
construction requirements prior to issuance of any building permits
within the subdivision is necessary for protection of public health
and safety:
• Construction of the wall will require heavy equipment
over an extended period of time. To minimize hazards
to residents associated with the operation of this
construction equipment, the wall should be built prior
to construction and occupancy of any new residences.
This Board finds that requiring fulfillment of the creekside
Intermittent Retaining Wall construction requirements prior to
issuance of any building permits within the subdivision is a
necessary prerequisite to the orderly development of the
surrounding area:
• The construction of the wall is needed to allow
development of both Parcels B and C.
• It is possible that the wall that the County would
ultimately require may extend onto Parcel B as well as
Parcel C. Allowing the wall to be built in increments
would be disruptive to the owners and residents of the
affected parcels, and ultimately more costly to
complete.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board
hearing; County General Plan.
B. Warren Road Frontage Improvements — This Board finds that
fulfillment of the Warren Road frontage improvement construction
requirements prior to issuance of a building permit on Parcel A for
protection of public health and safety due to the following factors:
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-2 7
• The Roadway Network Plan designates Warren Road as
an Existing Collector. The site is within an area that is
subject to growth and development that will lead to
increased traffic within the area including Warren Road
that will eventually cause hazardous conditions to
vehicular and pedestrian traffic.
• Parcel A contains an existing residence that the Project
does not propose to remove. Because there is an
existing residence on this parcel, it is possible that no
residential permit may be sought on the parcel for an
indefinite period of time. Unless the County issues a
residential permit or other grant of approval for
development of the parcel, the existing semi-rural
frontage conditions without curb, gutter or sidewalk, or
pavement widening may remain in its undeveloped
condition and allow more hazardous conditions to
develop near a major community intersection of an
Arterial and Collector road. In the absence of a
mechanism to empower the County to mitigate road
conditions, there may be no assurance that the planned
road improvements would be constructed in a timely
manner, when the County determined that they were
needed.
• Allowing the County to require the future owner of
Parcel A to install the frontage improvements at a
future date when the County determined that such
improvements would mitigate a hazardous road
condition along Warren Road, and thus avoid a
potential risk to the future risk to public health and
safety of the local community.
Thus, this Board finds that requiring the Subdivider to execute a
deferred improvement agreement prior to approval of a Parcel
Map, to empower the County to be able to require at a future date
that the future owner of Parcel A construct frontage improvements
along Warren Road that are required by the Subdivision Ordinance
for this Project, prior to issuance of a permit by the County for that
parcel, would assure the protection of public health and safety
conditions along Warren Road.
This Board finds that fulfillment of the Warren Road frontage
improvement construction requirements prior to issuance of a
building permit on Parcel A is a necessary prerequisite to the
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-28
orderly development of the surrounding area based on the
following factors:
• The Warren Road frontage of the Project Site is at a
major community intersection involving two
County-maintained streets. The Roadway Network
Plan designates Boulevard Way an Existing
Arterial, and Warren Road an Existing Collector.
Continued development in the Walnut Creek and
Lafayette communities will lead to more traffic on
local roads including this intersection. Eventually,
there will be a need to provide more capacity at this
major intersection. Insofar as the County is
involved with traffic safety issues on County-
maintained roads and when, as a result of increased
traffic and congestion conditions, road
improvements are needed to mitigate related
hazards.
• Rather than impose the Warren Road frontage
improvement Subdivision Ordinance requirement
on the Project as an improvement to be completed
with the Parcel Map improvement plans, the County
should retain its ability to impose the frontage
improvement requirement on a future owner of
Parcel A when future road conditions warrant such
improvement to allow for orderly development of
the circulation system in the community.
Accordingly, this Board finds that fulfillment of the Warren
Road frontage improvements required by the conditions in
the January 25, 2005 Conditions of Approval by requiring
the Subdivider to execute a deferred improvement
agreement with the County to provide those improvements
at a future date when the County determines that the
construction of those improvements is a necessary
prerequisite to the orderly development of the surrounding
area, even if it may result in requiring the construction of
those improvements prior to the issuance of a permit on the
affected parcel, Parcel A, or other grant of approval for
development of the parcel.
Evidence — Evidence and testimony presented at the Board hearing;
County General Plan.
Board of Supervisors Findings on
Lionsgate Development Corporation Subdivision
Minor Subdivision County File#MS03-001 S
Page F-29
GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Board\MS030015 Legal Findings.doc-d
RLH\RD\EW
Rev. 4-5-2005—rd
GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Board\MS030015 Legal Findings.doc-mp-b.doc
NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE 1 A-
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ON PLANNING MATTERS
WALNUT CREEK(SARANAP)AREA
NOTICE is hereby given that on Tuesday,April 5,2005 at 1:00 pm in the County Administration Building,651
Pine Street, (Corner of Pine and Escobar Streets), Martinez,California,the Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors will hold a continued public hearing to consider the following planning matter:
LIONSGATE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY(Appellant, Applicant&Owner), County
File#M5030015: An appeal of the County Planning Commission's decision to
conditionally approve a tentative map subdividing a.91 acre parcel into three lots; allow
an exception to the creek structure setback requirements of Title 9 and allow the
removal and alteration of multiple trees. (APN: 184-150-029)
The location of the subject property is within the unincorporated territory of the County of Contra Costa County,
State of California, generally identified below(a more precise description may be examined in the Office of the
Director of Community Development,County Administration Building,Martinez,California):
The location of the subject site is 2501 Warren Road,Walnut Creek.
For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (no Environmental Impact Report required)has
been issued for this project.
If you challenge this matter in Court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised
at the public hearing described at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the County at,or prior to,the public hearing.
Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday,April 5,2005 at
12:30 pm.,in Room 108,Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez,to meet with any interested parties
in order to(1)answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3)clarify the issues
being considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve,or narrow any differences
which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Ruben Hernandez,
Community Development Department, at(925)3 3 5-1210 by 3:00 pm.on Monday,April 4,2005 to confirm your
participation.
Date: March 24,2005
John Sweeten, Clerk of the
Board of Supervisors and
County Administrator
Byl
Katherine "'
!�inclair,Deputy Clerk