HomeMy WebLinkAbout072-2020DocuSign Envelope ID: 9CBB9BD5-3F6B-46A8-957E-8145F8A47BC7
RESOLUTION NO. 72-2020
OPPOSING THE TASSAJARA PARKS PROJECT IN UNINCORPORATED
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND REQUESTING THAT CONTRA COSTA
COUNTY REJECT THE FEIR AND DENY THE PROJECT AND ALL RELATED
ACTIONS
WHEREAS, Contra Costa County is currently considering the "Tassajara Parks" project,
including applications for a General Plan Amendment (GP07-0009), Rezoning (RZ09-
3212), Subdivision (SD10-9280) and a Final Development Plan (DP10-3008) including 771
acres on two sites located east of the Town limits, at the north end the Tassajara Valley;
and
WHEREAS, the project is located outside of the voter -approved County Urban Limit Line
(ULL), which was also approved by Danville voters as the Town's Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB); and
WHEREAS, the Town's 2030 General Plan includes the Upper Tassajara Valley as a
Special Concern Area to provide Danville with a greater voice in future land use changes
that might be considered by Contra Costa County, and the Special Concern Area
language states that "Danville supports maintaining the agricultural uses and
agricultural character of the Tassajara Valley" and that "Land uses outside the UGB
(ULL) should be consistent with the existing County General Plan designations for this
area."; and
WHEREAS, Chapter 82- 1 of the County Ordinance Code allows that proposed
expansions of 30 acres or less to the voter approved ULL do not require voter approval
and can be approved by a four-fifths vote of the Board of Supervisors upon making
certain findings; and
WHEREAS, Section 82-1.018 (a) (3) states "A majority of the cities that are party to a
preservation agreement and the county have approved a change to the urban limit line
affecting all or any portion of the land covered by the preservation agreement," and
WHEREAS, the applicants for the Tassajara Parks project have proposed the adoption of
an Agricultural Preservation Agreement (APA) that would effect up to 17,718 acres in the
Tassajara Valley; and
WHEREAS, the Town has been a party to ongoing discussions regarding the APA since
2015, and the APA was originally drafted to include the Town of Danville and the City
of San Ramon, recognizing that both cities have planning areas that include portions of
the Tassajara Valley within their respective General Plan planning areas; and
DocuSign Envelope ID: 9CBB9BD5-3F6B-46A8-957E-8145F8A47BC7
WHEREAS, a draft EIR was prepared and circulated for the project, and has
subsequently been revised and re -circulated two additional times; and
WHEREAS, the Town has submitted extensive comment letters on both the initial,
revised and re -circulated project EIRs which have raised numerous issues and concerns
regarding the adequacy of the DEIR, recirculated DEIR and FEIR; and
WHEREAS, the Danville Town Council has reviewed and considered all of the related
actions associated with the Tassajara Parks project, and finds that:
1. The proposed project includes a total development area of approximately 54 acres,
including 125 single family homes, subdivision grading necessary to build the
single family lots, a detention basin necessary to meet storm water run-off
requirements for the single family lots, a neighborhood park necessary to serve the
single family lots, equestrian and pedestrian staging areas. The area being
developed exceeds the 30 -acre exception allowed under Chapter 82-1 of the
County Ordinance Code by approximately 180% and should be subject to voter
approval.
2. The Town has historically been considered to be a party to land use considerations
that involve and effect the Tassajara Valley. The Town was a signatory to the
original 1998 APA proposed for the Tassajara Valley prior to voter approval of a
county ULL, and the Town has been a party to ongoing discussions regarding the
APA proposed as a part of the Tassajara Parks project since 2015. The unilateral
decision by Contra Costa County to exclude Danville as a signatory to the most
recent APA is a bad faith action inconsistent with recent and past precedent.
3. Without Danville as a signatory to the proposed APA, the Town challenges the
County's ability to find that "A majority of the cities that are party to a
preservation agreement and the county have approved a change to the urban limit
line affecting all or any portion of the land covered by the preservation agreement"
subject to Section 82-1.018 (a) (3) of the County Ordinance Code.
4. From a general plan and zoning perspective, the APA imposes no new
requirements and is proposed solely for the purpose of facilitating County
consideration to grant an exception to the voter approved ULL.
5. The Town has submitted extensive comment letters on both the initial, revised and
re -circulated project EIRs that have raised numerous concerns and identified
numerous deficiencies pertaining to CEQA adequacy.
6. The project and related APA are inconsistent with the Danville 2030 General Plan
Special Concern Area language which states that "Danville supports maintaining
the agricultural uses and agricultural character of the Tassajara Valley. Land uses
outside the UGB (ULL) should be consistent with the existing County General Plan
designations for this area."
DocuSign Envelope ID: 9CBB9BD5-3F6B-46A8-957E-8145F8A47BC7
7. The decennial ULL review completed by the County in 2016 concluded that there
was adequate land capacity within the current ULL to accommodate projected
growth.
8. The proposed project is inconsistent with smart growth principles that call for new
development to include greater affordability and be focused into more urban,
transit -oriented areas, consistent with the goals set by the Sustainable
Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375) and the California
Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32); NOW THEREFORE BE IT
RESOLVED that upon review and consideration of the application and record, the
Danville Town Council wishes to register its formal opposition to the Tassajara Parks
project and requests that Contra Costa County reject the FEIR and deny the project.
APPROVED by the Danville Town Council at a regular meeting on October 20, 2020, by
the following vote:
AYES: Arnerich, Blackwell, Morgan, Stepper
NOES: Storer
ABSTAINED: None
ABSENT: None
DocuSigned by:
,4
aonfanF9GznoaFr.
MAYOR
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:
r--DocuSigned by:
gota44 R. E4(4.41
`.®$QFCFCA00 DBFABG
CITY ATTORNEY
i_DocuSi ned by:
71735A3F04C942F
CITY CLERK