On August 8, the Oakley City Council will be asked to approve a 10-year extension of the Grand Cypress Preserve Development.
If it approved, it would apply to five existing development agreements and the master amendment would extend the term of each from Dec. 13, 2025 to Dec. 13, 2035—a 10-year extension.
- The Specific Plan and General Plan was amended in March 10, 2009.
- The SP-1 was adopted by ordinance March 24, 2009.
At the July 18 Planning Commission meeting, the applicant Andrew Han, representing ACD-TI Oakley, LLC, said the reason fore the extension request was they have 2-years remaining on the current development agreements and the ownership became the owner of the property in 2018.
“This development consists over 1,000 acres and 3,200 homes. It has a lot of government approvals in design, infrastructure requirements, preservation of biological habitats and so forth, the two-years remaining is insufficient amount of time to really carry out all the remaining tasks,” explained Han. “Therefore, in order for us to continue to make progress and to invest in excess of $100 million that is needed in the first tranche of Capital Improvement investment, we request that we have some additional time to implement. We hope we don’t use all the time, but having that flexibility would give us what we need to bring this community to fruition.”
According to Planning Manager Ken Strelo, he explained to the planning commissioners with the extension, it improves the likelihood that the Grand Cypress Preserve would move forward in the future which contributes to the infrastructure in the area, levees, cost sharing on E Cypress Road and a portion of Bethe Island Road.
KT KB Oakley LLC Subdivision 9311 (Planning Area 1)
- 5/8/2012: Vesting Tentative Map approved (City Council Resolution 45-12)
- 9/12/2005: Development Agreement approved (Ordinance 25-05)
- 5/22//2012: Development Agreement Amendment (Ordinance 03-12)
Lesher Trust Subdivision 9404 (Planning Area 1)
- 7/14/2015: Vesting Tentative Map approved (City Council Resolution 98-15)
- 11/10/2020: Amendment to Vesting Tentative Map approved (City Council Resolution 150-20)
- 9/26/2005: Development Agreement approved (Ordinance 25-05)
- 1/10/2012: Development Agreement Amendment (Ordinance 25-11)
Dal Porto South Subdivision 9401 (Planning Area 3)
- 7/14/2015: Vesting Tentative Map approved (City Council Resolution 96-15)
- 8/11/2015: Development Agreement approved (Ordinance 10-15)
Bethel Island LLC Subdivision 9156 (Planning Area 4)
- 11/8/2011: Vesting Tentative Map approved (City Council Resolution 122-11)
- 11/10/2020: Amendment to Vesting Tentative Map approved (City Council Resolution 149-20)
- 1/10/2012: Development Agreement approved (Ordinance 26-11)
Pacific West Communities Minor Subdivision 11-976 (Planning Area 6-H)
- 1/24/2012: Tentative Parcel Map approved (City Council Resolution 11- 12)
- 1/10/2012: Development Agreement approved (Ordinance 27-11)
Analysis
The Development Agreements Master Amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs in the ECCSP. It is also compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the ECCSP, and is designed in compliance with the approved development plans in that it does not result in any physical changes to any of the approved entitlements for any of the applicable Tentative Maps.
The Master Amendment is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice and will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare in that the development in the ECCSP is responsible for much of the infrastructure improvements or cost-sharing for those improvements in and around the area that will benefit future residents and existing residents of Summer Lake South and areas in unincorporated Contra Costa County, such as along Dutch Slough Road and Sandmound Boulevard and on Bethel Island, and the term extension will increase the likelihood these projects are developed, and as a result, that infrastructure completed. The Master Amendment will not adversely affect the development of the properties in that the term extension will increase the chances they are able to be developed in the future.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the City Council waive the first reading and introduce the proposed ordinance approving the project titled, Grand Cypress Preserve Development Agreements Master Amendment (DA 01-23).
Oakley City Council Meeting
Tuesday, August 08, 2023
6:30 PM
Oakley City Council Chambers located at 3231 Main Street, Oakley, California 94561
City Council Agenda — click here
Editors note
5 comments
Wow, what a name for a development. If I didn’t read the article I would have thought they were preserving the land. 3,200 more homes down Cypress Rd? Oakley has outgrown the town I moved into. So many new homes and so much more traffic.
The entire east county has been ruined by over population, crime and traffic. It’s a shame. It was once a nice, quiet area that was easy to navigate.
I agree with you 100%. Very good points.
I completely agree with you, Lizz. I wish they would preserve at least some of the small town charm. Some of the land could even turn into a miniature forest or something similar that gives the vibe of being in nature. I also wish they preserved their historic buildings.
Oh please no. Oakley already has far too many houses as is, and the jobs and amenities have already kept up. If the development continues as it always has, then there will pretty soon be no more room for actual amenities. The city doesn’t even have basic entertainment like a movie theater or a bowling alley (even the sleepiest towns I have seen at least have a theater), and the jobs are very scarce out here (the commute is not only a hassle for me, but employers have rejected me due to living too far). Not to mention that the schools are insanely overcrowded. Oakley should focus on building other things, like another high school, a college campus, a hospital, a movie theater, an outdoor pedestrianized mall, a bowling alley, a golf course, a botanical garden, a museum, a Dave & Buster’s, a performing arts theater, or anything that will bring more jobs – not more houses. If the city fills up with houses without any of the things mentioned, then not only will the town feel incomplete and include an increase of traffic, but the charm of the city will fade.
Comments are closed.