HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08072001 - C.35 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: MAURICE M. SHIU, CHIEF ENGINEER
DATE: August 7, 2001
SUBJECT: ADOPT the previously certified City of Brentwood Mitigated Negative Declaration(General Plan
Amendment GPA 99-2; Amendment to Planned Development Zone PD-29; and Tentative
Subdivision Map 8226) for the purpose of real property transactions in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act; Brentwood area. Project No. 7558-6D8712
Specific Request(s) or Recommendation(s) & Background & Justification
I. RECOMMENDED ACTION:
ADOPT the previously certified City of Brentwood Mitigated Negative Declaration (General Plan
Amendment GPA 99-2;Amendment to Planned Development Zone PD-29;and Tentative Subdivision Map
8226)for the purpose of real property transactions in compliance with the California Environmental Quality
Act, (the custodian of which is the Public Works Director who is located at 255 Glacier Drive, Martinez),
and
DIRECT the Director of Community Development to file a Notice of Determination, and
AUTHORIZE the Chief Engineer to arrange for payment of a $25 fee to Community Development for
processing, and a $25 fee to the County Clerk for filing the Notice of Determination.
Continued on Attachment: X SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR /
RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S):
ACTION OF BOARD ON August 07 , 2001 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED xx OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I hereby certify that this is a true and correct
xx UNANIMOUS(ABSENT j
AYES: NOES: copy of an action taken and entered on the
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the
date shown.
LC:sd
G:\GrpData\EngSvc\Enviro\2001 projects\Brent\vood Park Sub\
07ust
Brentwood Park Sub(8-7-01).doc ATTESTED: Au g , 2001
Orig.Div: Public works(Eng Sery Division)
Contact: Leigh Chavez, Phone(925)313-2366 JOHN SWEETEN, Clerk of the Board of
cc: County Administrator Supervisors and County Administrator
Attn: E. Kuevor
Auditor-Controller
Community Development—K. Piona
PW Accounting By
Real Property(D. Awenius) Deputy '
Environmental(L. Chavez)
SUBJECT: ADOPT the previously certified City of Brentwood Mitigated Negative Declaration(General Plan
Amendment GPA 99-2; Amendment to Planned Development Zone PD-29; and Tentative
Subdivision Map 8226) for the purpose of real property transactions in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act; Brentwood area. Project No. 7558-61387]2
DATE: August 7, 2001
PAGE: 2
II. FINANCIAL IMPACT:
There is no financial impact.
111. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND:
In October of 1999,the City of Brentwood published the General Plan Amendment GPA 99-2;Amendment
to Planned Development Zone PD-29;and Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 Mitigated Negative Declaration.
The Brentwood City Council considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration together with all comments
received during the public review period (no comments were received). The Brentwood City Council
adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration on December 14, 1999.
The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is adopting the City of Brentwood's CEQA document for the
purpose of conducting real property transactions necessary to provide access for flood control maintenance
activities. The developer will dedicate several parcels to the City of Brentwood. These parcels will have an
easement in favor of the Contra Costa County Flood Control District(District)for maintenance purposes. In
addition, an existing he
owned parcel will be dedicated to the City of Brentwood with a maintenance
easement in favor of the District reserved.
IV. CONSEQUENCES OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Delay in approving the project will prevent property transfers and result in a delay of project construction.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
651 PINE STREET 4TH FLOOR NORTH WING MARTINEZ, CALIFORNIA 94553-0095
Telephone: (925) 313-2296 Contact Person: Cece Sellgren, Environmental Planner
Project Description,Common Name(if any)and Location: Flood Control District Real Property Transactions
associated with City of Brentwood Mitigated Negative Declaration. In October of 1999,the City of Brentwood
published the General Plan Amendment GPA 99-2; Amendment to Planned Development Zone PD-29; and
Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 Mitigated Negative Declaration. The Brentwood City Council adopted the Mitigated
Negative Declaration on December 14, 1999. The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is adopting the City
of Brentwood's Mitigated Negative Declaration to address the necessary Flood Control District real property
transactions associated with the project. The developer will dedicate several parcels to the City of Brentwood.
These parcels will have an easement in favor of the Contra Costa County Flood Control District for maintenance
purposes. In addition, an existing Flood Control District owned parcel will be dedicated to the City of Brentwood
with a maintenance easement in favor of the District reserved. Project Location: The proposed project is located
near the intersection of Lone Tree Way and Anderson Lane in the Brentwood Area of East County.
The project was approved on
Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act:
( ) An Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified (SCH # )
( ) The Project was encompassed by an Environmental Impact Report previously prepared
for (SCH # ).
( X ) A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared following identification of a potentially significant
impact. The Mitigated Neg Dec (certified by the City of Brentwood) is being adopted by the Board of
Supervisors
Copies of the record of project approval and the Negative Declaration or the final EIR may be examined at the
office of the Contra Costa County Community Development Department.
( X ) The City of Brentwood determined the project will not have a significant environmental effect with
the incorporation of mitigation into the project description. The Board of Supervisors is adopting the
certified Mitigated Neg Dec.
( ) The Project will have a significant environmental effect.
( ) Mitigation measures were made a condition of approval of the project.
( ) A statement of overriding considerations was adopted.
( ) Findings were adopted pursuant to Section 15091 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Date: By:
Community Development Department Representative
AFFIDAVIT OF FILING AND POSTING
I declare that on I received and posted this notice as required by
California Public Resources Code Section 21152(c). Said notice will remain posted for 30 days from the filing
date.
Signature Title
Applicant: Department of Fish and Game Fees Due
Contra Costa County Public Works Dept. EIR- $850 Total Due: $
255 Glacier Drive Neg. Dec. - $1,250 Total Paid $
Martinez, CA 94553 DeMinimis Findings - $0
Attn: Karen Laws _X_ County Clerk - $50 Receipt#:
G:\GrpData\EngSvc\ENVIR0\2001 Projects\BrentwoodSub\NOD.doc
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
TO: FROM:
OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH CITY OF BRENTWOOD
1400 TENTH STREET 708 THIRD STREET
SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 BRENTWOOD,CA 94513-1396
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY CLERK
725 COURT STREET,COURTHOUSE
MARTINEZ,CA 94553
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
AND CITY POLICY, AN INITIAL STUDY -WAS .COND.UCTED TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE
FOLLOWING PROJECT MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. :ON THE BASIS
OF THE INITIAL STUDY IT HAS BEEN DETERMINED THAT:
THE PROPOSED PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT AND AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT IS NOT REQUIRED.
X ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT
ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THERE WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANTADVERSE EFFECT IN THIS
CASE BECAUSE THE MITIGATION MEASURES DESCRIBED IN THE INITIAL STUDY HAVE
BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT. AN ENVIRONEMNTAL IMPACT REPORT IS
NOT REQUIRED.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
TITLE: General Plan Amendment GPA 99-2,Amendment to Planned Development zone PD-29,
and Tentative Subdivision Map 8226(TSM 8226)
LOCATION: east of O'Hara Avenue,north of Lone Tree Way, and west of Anderson Lane to the City limits
DESCRIPTION: 171 acres to include 342 single-family detached units(including a 245-unit subdivision on 84
acres)&approximately 226,500 square feet of future Planned Employment Center uses on
Approximately 21 acres.
APPLICANT: Cardinale Company and the City of Brentwood
CONTACT PERSON AND TITLE: Michael Leana, Chief of Planning
NOTICE:
THIS DOCUMENT AND ALL SUPPORT MATERIAL ARE AVAILABLE FOR REVIEW IN THE OFFICE
LISTED ABOVE. THIS NEGATIVE DECLARATION MAY BECOME FINAL UNLESS WRITTEN
COMMENTS ARE RECEIVED AT THE OFFICE LISTED ABOVE BY 5:00 PM, November 16, 1999. IF YOU
WISH TO APPEAL THE APPROPRIATENESS OR ADEQUACY OF THIS DOCUMENT, ADDRESS YOUR
WRITTEN COMMENTS TO THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD, AS REFERENCED ABOVE, AND STATE THE
FINDING THAT THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT,
AND:
1. IDENTIFY THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECT(S), WHY THEY WOULD OCCUR,AND WHY
THEY WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT. EXPLAIN THE BASIS FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND
SUBMIT ANY SUPPORTING DATA;AND
2. SUGGEST ANY MITIGATION MEASURES WHICH YOU WOULD BELIEVE WOULD
REDUCE OR ELIMINATE THE EFFECT TO AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL.
CA 1,A'�
DATE: SIGNED. TITLE: CHIEF OF PLANNING
CITY OF BRENTWOOD
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA 99-2)
AMENDMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-29 (PD-29) ZONE
and TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP 8226
INITIAL STUDY AND
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
OCTOBER 1999
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction ..........................................................................................................................3
ProjectDescription...............................................................................................................8
Environmental Checklist ...................................................................................................12
.Environmental Checklist Form..........................................................................................15
Checklist Responses and Environmental Analysis............................................................20
References..................................................................................................................
List of Figures
Exhibit A—Project Site Identification of Existing Assessors Parcels.................................5
Figure 1 Project Area Map...............................................:.....................:..........................1 l
Figure 2 —Proposed Tentative Subdivision Map and Vicinity Map .................................12
INTRODUCTION
GENERAL PURPOSE/SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This Initial Study (IS) has been prepared to determine if the proposed project (project) will have a
significant effect on the environment and to identify feasible mitigation measures necessary to reduce
any such impacts to a level of insignificance.
The project site is comprised of approximately 171 acres located in the northerly part of the City of
Brentwood. It is generally rectangular in shape bounded by Anderson Lane on the east, Lone Tree Way
on the south, O'Hara Avenue on the west, and the proposed Neroly Road extension on the north. The
project site currently is designated in the City's General Plan for Residential-Very Low Density. (VL),.
and zoned Planned Development Twenty-Nine (PD-29). The project site generally is used for
agriculture and rural residential. It currently is subdivided into 37 privately-owned Assessor Parcels and
various rights-of-way for circulation and flood control.
The proposed project and scope of the environmental review is described as follows:
Activity Acreage Description
1. General Plan Amendment 20.95 acres Changes the land use designation from
(GPA 99-2) Residential-Very Low Density use (VL) to non-
residential uses consistent with the Planned
Employment Center (PEC) zone, such as
Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Office
Professional (OP).
2. Amendment to the Planned
Development PD-29 Zone
a. Rezone 20.95 acres Amends a portion of PD-29 to a Planned
Employment Center(PEC) zone consistent with
land use designations, such as NC and/or OP,
allowing approximately 226,500 square feet
of building area.
b. Development Standards 150.05 acres Establishes residential development standards for
a total of 342 homes:
a) TSM 8226 (245 lots on 84 acres), and
b) remaining 66.05 acres designated for very
low density residential use within PD-29 to
accommodate 97 total units.
3. Tentative Subdivision Map 84.00 acres Proposes a new residential subdivision of 245
8226 (TSM 8226) single-family detached homes with
neighborhood parks, open space, public rights-
of-way, and flood control facilities.
-1-
INTRODUCTION J\
A comprehensive list of the 37 parcels within the project site is provided in Exhibit "A." It shows the
current Assessor Parcel numbers, names of owners, size of each parcel, existing uses, and proposed
development.
A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be issued if, based upon the information presented in this study, it
is determined that the proposed project will not have any significant impacts or that such impacts can be
mitigated. If it is determined that the proposed project will have one or more significant impacts that
cannot adequately be mitigated, the lead agency (City) will require the preparation of an Environmental
Impact Report (EIR).
ENVIRONMENTAL PROCEDURES
This IS .has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970
(CEQA), as amended (Public Resources Code, Section 21000, et. seq.), and the California
Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (California Administrative Code Section 15000, et. seq.) This
report complies with the rules, regulations, and procedures for the implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act as adopted by the City of Brentwood.
LEAD AGENCY/CONTACT PERSONS
In accordance with Sections 15050 and 15367 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of Brentwood has
been designated the "lead agency" which is defined as the "public agency that has the principal
responsibility for carrying out or disapproving a project."
The project sponsor for all portions of PD-29, is the Cardinale Company representing the landowners of
all parcels.
Lead Agency: City of Brentwood
Mr. Michael Leana, Chief of Planning
Community Development Department
708 Third Street
Brentwood, California 94513
(925) 634-6905 - (925) 516-9857 (Fax)
Project Sponsor: Cardinale Company
1210 Central Boulevard, Suite 110
Brentwood, California 94513
(925) 516-1924
-2-
INTRODUCTION
RESPONSIBLE/TRUSTEE AGENCIES
Responsible agencies are those which have discretionary approval over one or more actions involved
with development of the proposed project site. Trustee Agencies are state agencies having discretionary
approval or jurisdiction by law over material resources affected by the project. Implementation of the
project as proposed does not require review or action either by responsible or trustee agencies.
TECHNICAL STUDIES
Three technical studies were prepared for this environmental review. The Phase I Environmental Site
Assessment specifically pertains to TSM 8226 (84 acres), and the Traffic Study pertains to the project
site as a whole (171 acres). In addition, a number of references (plans, letters, and reports) generally
pertaining to TSM 8226 were reviewed with this IS. Each of the following technical studies, reports,
plans, and letters have been included with this IS.
• Phase I, Environmental Site Assessment— This document, entitled "Phase 1, Environmental
Site Assessment on Proposed Residential Development - Anderson Lane, Brentwood, California for
Mr. George Cardinale, Project Number E7866" dated August 13, 1998, was prepared by Terrasearch,
Inc., Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists. This purpose of the report was to evaluate the possible
existence of hazardous waste on the site. The site was evaluated using on-site sources and sources
within a one mile radius of the site.
• Feasibility Evaluation (Project 7866) — This document, entitled "FEASIBILITY
EVALUATION, Proposed Residential Development, Anderson Lane, Brentwood, CA" dated
September 23, 1998, was prepared by Terrasearch, Inc., Geotechnical Engineers and Geologists.
The report reviewed the following site conditions: site features, projected type of construction,
anticipated subsurface conditions, faulting, and seismicity.
• Traffic Study — This document, entitled "Traffic Study for the O'Hara Avenue/Neroly Road
.Property, Tract No. 8226" dated October 8, 1999, was prepared by TJKM Transportation
Consultants. This study evaluated levels of service (LOS) at intersections in the vicinity of the
project site for development of the entire project. It also evaluated a number of other traffic issues
related to the project.
In addition, the following plans, reports, and letters specifically referencing TSM 8226 are available for
this review.
• Plan — This map entitled "Tentative Map, Subdivision 8226, Condon & Cunha Properties" dated
October 20, 1999, was prepared by Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc. The map indicates proposed
layout of lots, vehicular and pedestrian circulation, the flood control channel, and data summary for
the proposed development.
• East Diablo Fire Protection District — Letter dated August 18, 1999 from Richard S. Ryan,
Fire Inspector, outlining the conditions of approval for TSM 8226.
• City of Brentwood, Engineering Department — Memo dated August 23, 1999 from John
Stevenson stating conditions required for TSM 8226 pertaining to circulation, flood control, use of
non-potable water, shared cost of off-site improvements, utility mapping, and grading plans.
-3-
INTRODUCTION
• Tri Delta Transit, Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority — Letter dated August 20, 1999
from Steve Ponte, Assistant General Manager, addressing circulation improvements to accommodate
bus service to TSM 8226.
• Diablo Water District — Letter dated August 6, 1999 from Mike Yeraka, General Manager,
addressing the proposed water system plan.
PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
CEQA Section 15150 states the following with regard to the incorporation by reference of any prior
environmental documents having a relationship to the proposed project:
"An EIR or Negative Declaration may incorporate by reference all or portions of another
document which is a matter of public record or is generally available to the public. Where all or
part of another document is incorporated by reference, the incorporated language shall be
considered to be set forth in full as part of the text of the EIR or Negative Declaration."
The project site has been analyzed in one previous environmental review document which forms the
basis of analysis in this IS:
• General Plan Final EIR - The environmental impacts associated with proposed project were
previously analyzed in this EIR certified in 1993 (SCH# 92063113). The City's General Plan
proposed development of.the site with a single-family residential use. The mitigation measures
approved with the Final EIR for the General Plan have been re-evaluated for adequacy with the
proposed project are.hereby incorporated by reference in this Negative Declaration.
As further required by CEQA Section 15150, the documents referenced above will be available for
public inspection during normal business hours at:
City of Brentwood
Community Development Department
708 Third Street
Brentwood, California 94513
-4-
EXHIBIT "A"
Project Site Identification of Existing Assessor Parcels and Use
Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226)
Property Owner APN Acreage Existing Proposed
Units Units
1 (1) Condon 018-030-002 44.00
2 (2) Cunha 018-030-003 22.40
3 (3) Cunha 018-030-004 5.90
4 (4) Cunha 018-060-016 .17
5 (5) Cunha 018-060-037 11.50
Subtotal: 5 parcels 84.00± 245
Property proposed for
Plan Employment Center Reserve (PEC Reserve)
Property Owner APN Acreage Existing Proposed
Units Units
6 (l) Bradshaw 018-060-050 2.80 0 0
7 (2) Turcotte 018-060-051 2.45 0 0
8 (3) Nicoletti 018-060-007' 4.70 0 0
9 (4) Nicoletti 018-060-006 11.00 0 0
Subtotal:. 4 parcels 21.00± 0 0
-5-
EXHIBIT "A"
Project Site Identification of Existing Assessor Parcels and Use
Property proposed for Residential Development
(outside of TSM 8226)
Property Owner APN Acreage Existing Proposed
Units Units
10 (l) Valle 018-030-013 1.13 2 2
11 (2) O'Brien 018-030-012 1.30 1 3
12 (3) Kindt 018-060-029 2.60 1 5
13 (4) Kutch 018-060-047 .82 1 2
14 (5) Martinez 018-060-012 .31 1 1
15 (6) Passey 018-060-048 .75 1 2
16 (7) Peters 018-060-010 1.30 1 3
17 (8) Gaudinier 018-060-030 1.90 1 3
18 (9) Rico 018-060-031 2.20 1 3
19 (10) Turner 018-060-018 2.50 1 5
20 (11) Wondolowski 018-060-017 .50 1 1
21 (12) Wondolowski 018-060-019 .50 1 1
22 (13) Davies 018-060-045 1.00 1 2
23 (14) Navarro 018-060-046 2.00 1 4
24 (15) Briones 018-060-043 5.43 1 10
25 (16) Kriens 018-060-042 5.00 1 9.
26 (17) Dannenburg 018-060-041 5.10 1 9
27 (18) McGoveran 018-060-004 1.00 1 1
28 (19) Brister 018-060-035 .71 1 1
29 (20) Hurtado 018-060-034 .87 1 2
-6-
EXHIBIT "A"
Project Site Identification of Existing Assessor Parcels and Use
Property Owner APN Acreage Existing Proposed
Units Units
30 (21) Harris 018-060-039 1.00 1 1
31 (22) Carson 018-060-038 1.90 1 2
32 (23) Fugi 018-060-040 5.30 1 12
33 (24) Martins 018-030-008 4.20 1 5
34 (25) Reed 018-030-010 1.26 1 2
35 (26) Duarte 018-030-011 1.28 1 2
36 (27) Garrido 018-030-006 .73 1 2
37 (28) Orman . 018-030-007 .68 1 2
Subtotal: 28 parcels 54.00± 29 97
Right-Of-Way
Use Acreage
a. Flood Control R/W. 1.64
b. O'Hara Avenue R/W 2.90
C. Lone Tree R/W 3.80
d. Anderson Lane R/W 3.58
Subtotal: 12.00±
PROJECT SITE Acreage Existing Proposed
Units Units
TOTAL: 171± 29 342
-7-
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
BACKGROUND
The project site is comprised of 171 acres, generally rectangular in shape, and currently consisting of 37
legal parcels under various ownerships within the city limits of the City Brentwood. The project site is
located immediately adjacent to the northerly boundary of the city limits, and is bounded on the west by
O'Hara Avenue, on the south by Lone Tree Way, on the east by Anderson Lane, and on the north by the
proposed extension of Neroly Road. Figure 1 illustrates the project's location within the general
Brentwood vicinity.
The local topography of the site is relatively flat, but gently slopes toward the northeast. The northerly
portion of the site is generally in agricultural or rural residential use. The central, southerly, and
westerly portions of the project site generally are occupied by agriculture and very-low density
residential uses. Currently, all 171 acres are designated in the City's General Plan with a land use
designation of Residential-Very Low Density (VL) defined as 1.1 to 3 units per acre. An open drainage
channel enters the southern edge of the project site near the intersection of Lone Tree Way and Anderson
Lane and extends upstream to the northern portion of the site.
The project site is situated in the Planned Development PD-29 zone adopted as a "shell PD" with
development standards to be established consistent with the VL land use designation. The largest of the
properties within the project site is owned by the Condon and Cunha families who control 44 and 40
acres, respectively. These owners, through the Applicant/Developer, have proposed an 84-acre
subdivision of 245 single-family detached homes. The proposed residential subdivision (TSM 8226) is
part of the proposed project and addressed in this IS.
The project site is surrounded by unincorporated area on three sides except for approximately one third
of the southerly boundary along Lone Tree Way which connects to the Brentwood city limits and the
area to the north which was recently incorporated as part of the new city of Oakley (July 1, 1999).
However, with exception to the area north of the project site (within the Oakley city limit), all of the
surrounding properties are located within the Planning Area (Sphere of Influence) for the City of
Brentwood. Uses surrounding the project site are described as follows:
• on the south across Lone Tree Way - rural residential, agricultural, and horticultural uses.
• on the west across O'Hara Avenue - agricultural uses, including fields and farmhouses.
• on the north between the proposed Neroly Road extension and Brownstone Road immediately to the
north - orchards, vineyards and some residential units
• at the northwest corner of O'Hara Avenue and Neroly Road - Freedom High School.
• on the east across Anderson Lane - fields and residences.
-8-
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT
The proposed project includes: a) General Plan Amendment (GPA 99-2), b) Amendment to the Planned
Development PD-29 zone, and c) Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226). Each of the three
components are described as follows:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA 99-2) changes the land use designation of approximately 21
acres of the project site from Residential-Very Low Density use (VL) to non-residential uses
consistent with the Planned Employment Center (PEC) zone, such as Neighborhood Commercial
(NC) and Office Professional (OP). The proposed non-residential land use designation is located
in the southwesterly corner of the project site (northeast corner of Lone Tree Way and O'Hara
Avenue.) It is a rectangular shape, generally twice as long along Lone Tree Way as it is along
O'Hara Avenue (approximately 1,360 feet x 670 feet). The area subject to the General Plan
Amendment is comprised of four Assessor Parcels with three different owners as shown on
Exhibit A.
• Amendment to the Planned Development PD-29 Zone includes two parts — a) amends a portion
of PD-29 (approximately 21 acres) to a Planned Employment Center (PEC) zone consistent with
non-residential land use designations such as Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and/or Office
Professional (OP) allowing the development of approximately 226,500 square feet of space, and
b) establishes development standards consistent with the areas specified for residential uses. In
addition to the development standards for TSM 8226, discussed below, the Amendment to PD-29
generally establishes development standards for the remaining 66 acres designated for residential
uses.
• Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226), Condon/Cunha Property proposes an 84-acre
subdivision of 245 lots for single-family detached residential units along with neighborhood
parks, open space, flood control, and a publicly-owned site-serving internal circulation system of
rights-of-way for vehicles and pedestrians. TSM 8226 currently is comprised of five, legal
parcels with two different owners as shown on Exhibit A. It is generally located in the northerly
portion of the project site east of O'Hara Avenue, west of Anderson Lane, and south of the
proposed extension of Neroly Road.
The site for TSM 8226 currently is undeveloped and formerly was in agricultural use. The
topography is relatively flat and vanes between 70 feet above mean sea level at the eastern
portion of the site to approximately 75 feet above mean sea level on western portion of the site,
representing a change in elevation of approximately five feet. Based on the review of aerial
photographs and historical topographic maps, the site was formerly used as an orchard. TSM
8226 would be developed at a density of 2.92 dwelling units per acre which is at the upper end of
the range (maximum 3.0 dwelling units per acre) allowed under the General Plan for Residential-
Very Low(VL) Density use.
The proposed internal vehicular system for TSM 8226 provides access to each of the lots to be
created. Primary access to the development is proposed from O'Hara Avenue on the west with
two secondary entrances from Anderson Lane on the east. The proposed project is compatible
with the surrounding uses and is consistent with the VL land use designation in the General Plan.
-9-
PROJECT DESCRIPTION0
.
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
Implementation of the proposed project will require the following discretionary actions listed as follows:
• Adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed project, which includes a General
Plan Amendment(GPA 99-2), Amendment to the PD-29 zone, and approval of TSM 8226.
• An amendment to the General Plan allowing for a mix of NC (Neighborhood Commercial) and/or
OB (Office/Building uses)within PD-29.
• An amendment to the Zoning Ordinance allowing for Planned Employment Center (PEC) uses
within a defined portion of PD-29, totaling approximately 21 acres.
• Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226).
-10-
i
� a. S�j#r7►et �
It �'
� Ott
a r
31
t -
iyx�x a
j ;.•-�
f ..
a
I e 65
- - r t•
r :
J°
y.
- J L• a
^
^
- z .
di
., -�-�---rte---
1
Ilk
v
(/J
.q
'`M" a ..r _ - .'._ x_ f ...\ •„< � � fes..,-r..
k
{{ ,
µ
,
, P+a i}
.i
X.
,
E R
r v
Z-4
> ♦i 'fit: 'i. •
1
f
pi E'1 ti �....aa0a.11 t� 1 ti t ■' W
lil lfl lii iii ftl if liil lit!l�ii l I».ggq....p t II I fill
1 i ` I! It tl t u1tEa o�oa� � 1 jt
� Isl! tai! O'er' W �
All
y�y f l
44
-1 17, f
all
-���';^� pp ', •13•I .n.::{'..a�...�1 iR1 1 7 1 .1 .1 t) t R all
•��:'. n
_e t`:_. f.T. r� � ^.KI..§�-'Se�,,,l 1•� e! IFi •g '1 cl t, t! 1 I1 gW
1l
`-•' 'i..l�l�; e ;t'.,� 15 i3� :�1 muss• _! -
1 mus i - - mus t
i'1 _
112
� it; a± .'. aj aj =' �! 7 =! R i• P 1 Vic•,
— —
,1} _ ice
.ori -----'-- ._..._. - n-•----' --.�� `-- � � `.sw•. ':-.,:-� E
F 1
�� �I'�. tltus�. •k as a� E E i ?i �°. ''1 �;�:o��` _ .�j'!:___``- �R
21
�
R� 1
o
I�
a Id
RP
R � ill a
I� •
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
INTRODUCTION
The following two sections evaluate the potential impacts of the proposed project.
I. Environmental Checklist - The environmental checklist, approved by the City and consistent
with CEQA Guidelines, is used to focus this study on physical, social, and economic factors that
may be further impacted by the proposed project. The checklist indicates one of the following
determinations for each specified potential impact under each category of impact included on the
checklist:
a) "potentially significant impact"
b) "potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated"
c) "less than significant impact"
d) "no impact" -
II. Checklist Responses and Environmental Analysis - The Checklist Responses and
Environmental Analysis addresses in detail those impacts identified in the checklist. A brief
explanation is required for all answers except "no impact" answers that are adequately supported.
A "no impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the
impact simply does not apply to the proposed project.
SOURCES
The following documents are referenced information sources utilized by this analysis:
1. City of Brentwood General Plan and General Plan Final EIR(SCH# 92063113).
2. City of Brentwood Zoning Ordinance.
3. Report entitled "Phase I, Environmental Site Assessment on Proposed Residential
Development- Anderson Lane, Brentwood, California" dated August 13, 1998, prepared by
Terrasearch, Inc.
4. "Feasibility Evaluation" dated September 23, 1998 prepared by Terrasearch, Inc.
5. Traffic Study for the O'Hara Avenue/Neroly Road Property (Tract 8226) dated October 6, 1999
prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants.
6. Plan entitled "Tentative Map, Subdivision 8226, Condon& Cunha Properties", prepared by
Carlson, Barbee& Gibson, Inc.
7. East Diablo Fire Protection District, letter dated August 18, 1999.
8. City of Brentwood,Engineering Department, memo dated August 23, 1999.
9. Tri Delta Transit, Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority, letter dated August 20, 1999.
10. Diablo Water District, letter dated August 6, 1999.
11. City of Brentwood Park and Recreation Master Plan.
12. Field and/or staff office review.
13. Soil Survey of Contra Costa County, California. U.S. Department of Agricultural Soil
Conservation Service (September 1977).
An Initial Study is a preliminary analysis prepared by the lead agency to determine whether an EIR or
Negative Declaration must be prepared and to identify the significant effects to be analyzed in an EIR
(CEQA Guidelines Sec. 15365). The Initial Study for the proposed project will serve to focus on effects
-13-
ENVmonnNTAL CHECKLIST
determined to be potentially significant. In accordance with CEQA Guidelines, the following checklist has
been prepared that identifies any environmental effects.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment (GPA 99-2 changing a portion of the project site from
Residential-Very Low Density use (VL) to a mix of Neighborhood Commercial (NC)and/or.Office
Business Park (OB) consistent with the Planned Employment Center (PEC) zone, Amendment to
Planned Development PD-29 zone to establish development standards and include a Planned
Employment Center(PEC), and Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226).
2. Lead Agency Name: City of Brentwood
3. Contact person and phone number: Mr. Michael Leana, Chief of Planning
(925) 634-6905
4. Project location: The proposed project encompasses 171 gross acres (see Exhibit A for a list of
37 existing parcels). The project site is located east of O'Hara Avenue, north of Lone Tree Way,
west of Anderson Lane, and south of the proposed Neroly Road extension.
5. Name and address of project sponsor: Cardinale Company
(Applicant/Developer) 1210 Central Boulevard, Suite 110
Brentwood, California 94513
(925) 516-1924
6. General plan designation: Residential-Very Low Density (VL)
7. Zoning: PD-29
8. Description of project: A proposed amendment to the General Plan changing a portion of the
site (21 acres) from Residential-Very Low Density use (VL) to a mix of Neighborhood
Commercial (NC) and/or Office Business Park (OB). An amendment to the Planned
Development PD-29 establishing residential development standards and a Planned Employment
Center (PEC) consistent with the General Plan Amendment (allowing the development of
approximately 226,500 square feet of space), and Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226)
involving the subdivision of 84 acres into 245 detached single-family residential lots, including a
neighborhood park and trail, and a publicly-owned site-serving internal circulation systems for
vehicles and pedestrians.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: The setting is rural and bordered on all sides by a mix of
very low density residential uses, agricultural uses, and vacated agricultural uses.
10. Other public agencies whose approval may be required: None
-14-
ENVRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below potentially would be affected by this project involving at least
one impact that is a"Potentially Significant Impact" indicated by the checklist on the following pages:
❑x Land Use and Planning ❑x Transportation/Circulation ❑x Public Services
El Population and Housing ❑ Biological Resources El Utilities and Service Systems
❑x Geological Problems El Energy and Mineral Resources El Aesthetics
El Water El Hazards El Cultural Resources
El Air Quality El Noise El Recreation
El Mandatory Findings of Significance
DETERMINATION:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
El I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet
have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project.may have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on an earlier analysis as described on attached
sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated."
An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze.only the effects that
remain to be addressed.
❑ 1 find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and.(b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project.
Lc I � —17 —
�
Signature Date
Michael Leana Chief of Planning
Printed Name Title
-15-
CHECKL`1ST RESPONSES AND ENViRONm[EN L ANALYSIS
Potentially
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Significant Less than
Significant Unless Significant
(The numbers in parentheses indicate the source documents Impact Mitigation Impact No Impact
listed on page 15.) Incorporated
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING.
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1 and 2)
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or ❑ ❑ ❑
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the project? (Source 1,5,7,8;9 and 10)
C) Be incompatible with existing land uses in the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
vicinity? (Source 1,2, 11, 12 and 13)
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations(e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑
.impacts to soils or farmlands,or impacts from
incompatible land uses)? (Source 1,2, 11 and 12)
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
established community(including a low income or
minority community)? (Source 1 and 12)
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local ❑ ❑ x❑ ❑
population projections? (Source 1 and 5)
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑
indirectly(e.g.,through projects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major infrastructure)?
(Source 1 and 5)
C) Displace existing housing,especially affordable ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
housing? (Source 1 and 2) .
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS.
Would the proposal result in or expose people to
potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture? (Source 1,3 and 4) ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
b) Seismic ground shaking? (Source 1,3 and 4) ❑ ❑ ❑
C) Seismic ground failure,including liquefaction? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
(Source 1,3 and 4)
d) Seiche,tsunami,or volcanic hazard? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,3 and 4)
e) Landslides or mudflows? (Source 1,3 and 4) ❑ ❑ ❑
Erosion,changes in topography or unstable soil ❑ ❑ ❑
conditions from excavation,grading,or fill?
(Source 1,3 and 4)
g) Subsidence of land? (Source 1,3 and 4) ❑ ❑ ❑
h) Expansive soils? (Source 1,3 and 4) ❑ NX ❑ ❑
i) Unique geologic or physical features? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,3 and 4)
-16-
CHECKLIST RESPONSES AND ]ENMONMEENQ ANALYSIS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially
(The numbers in parentheses indicate the source documents Potentially Significant Less than.
Significant Unless Significant
listed on page 15.). Impact Mitigation Impact No Impact
Incorporated
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates,drainage patterns,or the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
rate and amount of surface runoff?
(Source 1,2,3,and 4)
b) Exposure of people or property to water related ❑ ❑ ❑
hazards such as flooding? (Source 1,2,3,4,6 and 8)
C) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of ❑ ❑ Q ❑
surface water quality(e.g.,temperature,dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)? (Source 1,2,3,4 and 6)
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water ❑ ❑ ❑
body? (Source 1,2,3,4 and 12)
e) Changes in currents,or the course or direction of ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
water movements? (Source 1,2,3,6, 8 and 12)
f) Changes in the quantity of ground waters,either ❑ ❑ ❑
through direct additions or withdrawals,or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or
through substantial loss of groundwater recharge
capability? (Source 1,2,3 and 4)
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
(Source 1,2,3 and 4)
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2,3,and 4)
i) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater ❑ ❑ ❑
otherwise available for public water supplies?
(Source 1,2,3 and 4)
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an ❑ ❑ ❑
existing or projected air quality violation?
(Source 1 and 2)
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1 and 2)
C) Alter air movements,moisture,or temperature,or ❑ ❑ ❑
cause any change in climate? (Source 1 and 2)
d) Create objectionable odors? (Source 1 and 2) ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicular trips or traffic congestion? ❑ 0 . ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2 and 5)
b) Hazards to safety from design features(e.g.,sharp ❑ ❑ ❑
curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible
uses(e.g.,farm equipment)? (Source 1,2,5, 8 and 9)
C) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
uses? (Source 1,2,6,7 and 8)
d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? ❑ ❑ ❑x ❑
(Source 1,2,5 and 6)
C) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ❑ ❑ n ❑
(Source 1,2,5,6 and 8)
-17-
HECIC03T
C RESPONSES AND ENVII2ONMEANALYSIS
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially
(The numbers in parentheses indicate the source documents Potentially Significant Less than
Significant Unless Significant
listed on page 15.) Impact Mitigation Impact No Impact
Incorporated
fj Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative ❑ ❑ ❑
transportation(e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)?
(Source 1,2,5,9 and 11) .
g) Rail,waterborne or air traffic impacts? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1 and 2) X
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered,threatened or rare species or their ❑ ❑ ❑
habitats(including but not limited to plants,fish,
insects,animals,and birds)? (Source 1,2 and 12)
b) Locally designated species(e.g.,heritage trees)? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2 and 11)
C) Locally designated natural communities(e.g.,oak ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
forest,coastal habitat,etc.)? (Source 1,2,3 and 4)
d) Wetland habitat(e.g.,marsh,riparian,and vernal ❑ ❑ ❑ Q
pool)? (Source 1,2,3 and 4)
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2, 11 and 12)
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES.
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plan? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1 and 2)
b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and ❑ ❑ ❑
inefficient manner? (Source 1 and 2)
C) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ ❑
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the State? (Source 1,2 and 4)
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous ❑ ❑ Q ❑
substances(including,but not limited to,oil,
pesticides,chemicals,or radiation)?
(Source 1,2 and 3)
b) Possible interference with an emergency response ❑ ❑ ❑
plan or emergency evacuation plan?
(Source I and 7)
C) The creation of any health hazard or potential health ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
hazard? (Source 1,2,3,and 4)
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential ❑ ❑ ❑
health hazards? (Source 1 and 3)
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, ❑ ❑ ❑ 0
grass,or trees? (Source 1,7 and 12)
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
-18-
CHEClu.`�' RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI L AN
ALYSIS .
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially
(The numbers in parentheses indicate the source documents Potentially Significant Less than
Significant Unless Significant
listed on page 15.) Impact Mitigation Impact No Impact
Incorporated
a) Increases in existing noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1 and 2)
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1 and 2)
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an
effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered
government services in any,of thefollowing areas:
a) Fire protection? (Source 1,2 and 7) ❑ ❑ ❑
b) Police protection? (Source 1 and 2) ❑ ❑ p
C) Schools? (Source 1) ❑ ❑ _ ❑
d) Maintenance of public facilities,including roads? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2 and 8)
e) Other government services? (Source 1) ❑ ❑ ❑
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would
the proposal result in a need for new systems or
supplies, or substantial alterations to the following:
a) Power or natural gas? (Source 1 and 6) ❑ ❑ Q ❑
b) Communication systems? (Source 1 and 6) ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
C) Local or regional.water treatment or distribution ❑ ❑ ❑
systems? (Source 1 and 8)
d) Sewer or septic tanks? (Source 4) ❑ FRI ❑ ❑
e) Storm water drainage? (Source 4 and 8) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
t) Solid waste disposal? (Source l) ❑ Q ❑ ❑
g) Local or regional water supplies? ❑ Q ❑ ❑
(Source 1,6 and 10)
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1, 11 and 12)
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2 and 12)
C) Create light or glare? (Source 1 and 2) ❑ ❑ ❑
-19-
• CxECKi,()RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI\.A ANALYSIS
Potentially
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Potentially Significant Less than
(The numbers in parentheses indicate the source documents Significant Unless Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact No Impact
listed on page 15.) Incorporated
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Disturb paleontological resources? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
(Source 1)
b) Disturb archaeological resources? (Source 1 and 4) ❑ ❑ ❑
C) Have the potential to cause a physical change which ❑ ❑ ❑. a
would affect unique ethnic cultural values?
(Source 1)
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the ❑ ❑ ❑
potential impact area? (Source 1)
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional ❑ ❑ ❑
parks or other recreational facilities?
(Source 1,2 and 11)
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? ❑ ❑ ❑
(Source 1,2 and 11)
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
quality of the environment,substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels,threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community,reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or pre-history?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve ❑ ❑ ❑
short-term,to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
C) Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ ❑ ❑
limited,but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects,the effects of other current projects,and the
effects of probable future projects.)
d) Does the project have environmental effects which ❑ O ❑
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings.either directly or indirectly?
-20-
CBECKi._.I'RESPONSES AND ENviRoNr lMN L ANALYSIS
The following discussion responds to the questions on the Environmental Checklist Form marked with anything
other than "no impact." Each response is identified with the Roman numeral, name, and letter(s) which
correspond to the impact category shown on the checklist form Only those questions marked other than "no
impact" are discussed below. As stated previously, questions receiving a response of "no impact" which are
adequately supported do not require further explanation. The source documents used in this analysis are identified
on the checklist by indicating the document number(shown on page 15)in parentheses next to the related question.
The proposed project is comprised of three components involving a project site of approximately 171 acres,
generally rectangular in shape. It is located within the City of Brentwood at the northerly city limits, and is bounded
by O'Hara Avenue on the west by, Lone Tree Way on the south, Anderson Lane on the east, and the proposed
extension of Neroly Road on the north. The three components of the proposed project are described as follows:
1) General Plan Amendment GPA 99-2,
2) Amendment to the Planed Development PD-29 zone establishing residential development standards and
including a Planned Employment Center(PEC)Reserve,and
3) Tentative Subdivision Map 8226 (TSM 8226).
At this time,only TSM 8226 has proposed a specific lot configuration within the project site that is different from the
existing layout. All responses and mitigation measures address the project site, as a whole, unless indicated to
address a specific part of the three components of the proposed project.
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING(a,c,d and e)
General Plan and Zoning Consistency
The northerly portion of the site is generally in agricultural or rural residential use. The central, southerly, and
westerly portions of the project site generally are occupied by agriculture and very-low density residential uses.
The Feasibility Evaluation .(for TSM 8226) dated September 23, 1998 by Terrasearch, Inc. indicates that
California Department of Conservation Division of Mines and Geology identified a former sand and gravel
operation in the northeasterly portion of the project site. However, no surficial evidence of this operation is
discernable on the project site, and no other historical documentation is available to corroborate this finding.
Currently, all 171 acres are designated in the City's General Plan with a land use designation of Residential-Very
Low Density (VL) defined as 1.1 to 3 units per acre. Also, all 171 acres are included within the PD-29 zone
adopted, in November 1996 (Ordinance No. 574), as a "shell" until further development standards could be
established within the VL land use designation.
NON-RESIDENTIAL - The project proposes to amend the General Plan on approximately 21 acres at the
southwest corner of the project site (northeast corner of O'Hara Avenue and Lone Tree Way) from the
residential VL land use designation to non-residential uses consistent with the Planned Employment Center
(PEC)zone, such as Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Office Professional (OP). To maintain consistency
between the General Plan land use designation and the zoning, the PD-29 zone will be amended to reserve
this 21 acres within the PD-29 zone as a Planned Employment Center (PEC). This area is comprised of four
Assessor Parcels with three different owners as shown on Exhibit A. Proposed development plans for non-
residential uses have not been formulated at this time. However, for the purpose of this assessment and
consistent with the traffic study undertaken for this project, this area has been projected to accommodate
approximately 226,500 square feet.
-21-
CHECh,.�6 RESPONSES AND EN i[RoNMEh x` .
ANALYSIS
The General Plan states:
"...Very Low (VL) residential category provides for fairly large lots for single-family residences in an
identifiable; suburban residential neighborhood, or cluster-style development designed with open space and
other amenities. Neighborhoods with either development type should be considered part of the Brentwood
urban area and be provided with urban public facilities and services."
The proposed General Plan amendment changing a portion of the project site VL to non-residential uses would
be compatible with the description in the General Plan indicating that "urban area services" should be provided.
This area presumably would provide neighborhood-serving retail services, neighborhood-serving professional
services, and employment opportunities for people within the area. However, since a specific project has not
been proposed for the PEC Reserve area, any future projects proposed within this area would have to be
evaluated in the context of its compatibility with the adjacent VL uses and the neighborhood-serving purpose of
that specific development.
RESIDENTIAL - The remaining 150.05 acres would retain its VL land use designation and provide over all
zoning for 342 single family detached residential units. The residentially zoned and designated area would
include: 1) the proposed 84-acre TSM 8226, and 2) the remaining 66.05 acres currently subdivided as 28
legal parcels with agricultural uses and 29 existing rural residential units.
• TSM 8226, known as the Condon & Cunha property, is located in the northerly portion of the project site and
is comprised of five legal parcels (two different owners)as shown in Exhibit A. The property formerly was
in agricultural use and currently is undeveloped. Based on the review of aerial photographs and historical
topographic maps, the site was formerly used as an orchard. The only structures on the site are two barns and a
wind generator.
TSM 8226 would be developed with 245 single-family detached units, along with supporting open space and
recreational area, internal vehicular system, and public rights-of-way, as follows,.,.•
A density within the subdivision of 2.92 units per acre (the upper end of the range for density
allowed under the General Plan)with: a) minimum lot size of 7,000 square feet, b) maximum lot
size of 19,559 square feet,and c)average lot size is 9,244 square feet;
12.83 acres of neighborhood parks located in the north-central area of the site, including a linear
park along the northerly boundary of the site and improvement of an existing open drainage
channel (flood control)that also will serve as open space and recreational trail usq and
A system of public streets and rights-of-way providing access and serving the site.
• The remaining 66.05 acres units could be developed with 97 units which is 68 units more than the existing 29
units. Future development of residential uses within this area will be reviewed using the standards approved for
TSM 8226 as a benchmark.
The resulting overall density of the project site at build-out would be 2.28 units per acre for the residential
portion only and a mid-range of 2 units per acre for the entire PD-29 zone including the future PEC area.
The project site is surrounded by unincorporated area on three sides, except for approximately one third of the
southerly boundary along Lone Tree Way which connects to the Brentwood City limits and the recently incorporated
City of Brentwood along the northerly boundary. However, with exception to the area north of the project site
(within the city of Oakley), all of the surrounding properties are located within the Sphere of Influence of the City of
Brentwood. Existing land uses in the vicinity include rural (low-density)residential, fields, orchards,vineyards, and
-22-
CHECK L�-S RESPONSES AND ENVIRONmmN.�iL ANALYSIS
other agricultural uses. The area is trending towards conversion from agricultural to residential use in accordance
with the General Plan, and surrounding areas have been planned for low-density residential and neighborhood-
serving uses. Therefore, with the mitigation measures listed below, the proposed project would be compatible with
existing uses in the vicinity.
Existing Land Use/Agricultural Resources& Operations
Previously conducted studies for projects in the Brentwood area and past history of agricultural use support the
finding that soils on the project site would be highly suitable for agricultural production. A soil survey of Contra
Costa County identifies the soils in this area as clay/loam (Rba),Capay Clay(CaA)and Delhi Sand(DaQ. The first
two are good for row and field crops; the third for almonds and grapes. The proposed project would result in the
permanent conversion of the existing agricultural land use to new development, both residential and non-residential.
The General Plan includes agricultural preservation policies in the Conservation/Open Space Element(page IV. 1-4
and 1-5)which describes potential agricultural preservation program components. The General.Plan also designates
more than 2,500 acres along the eastern and southeastern portions of the General Plan Area as Agriculture
Conservation (AC) for permanent agricultural preservation. Implementation of these policies would contribute
toward mitigating the potentially significant impact of the proposed project on agricultural resources.
The proposed project may have the result of discouraging or restricting farming on other properties in the area by
contributing to the encroachment of urban/suburban development on existing agricultural uses. Impacts associated
with agricultural operations (such as noise, dust, odors, pesticide usage, field trespassing, and crop theft) may result
in disparities and conflicts between existing agricultural uses and new, suburban residents seeking quality of life and
protection of their real estate investments. Since the proposed project would conform with the General Plan,
subsequent conversion from agricultural to residential and neighborhood-serving uses would be consistent with
approved policies and plans.
The proposed project would induce a change in the physical arrangement of an established within an existing land
use pattern of rural residential and agricultural uses to a suburban residential neighborhood of single-family detached
homes with public open space and rights-of-way. However, this type of development is consistent and compatible
with the General Plan.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures shall be required in order to mitigate the land use compatibility impacts between
uses comprising the proposed project, and between the proposed project and existing agricultural uses, to a less than
significant level:
1. The City shall require the Applicant/Developer of this subdivision to inform and notify the
homebuyers, if appropriate, in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going agricultural
activities in the immediate area. Notification shall be provided by a Department of Real Estate
Subdivision Report or some other form of disclosure statement (if there is no Subdivision Report).
The notifications shall disclose that the Brentwood area is an agricultural area subject to ground and
aerial applications of chemicals and early morning or nighttime farm operations which may create
noise,dust,etc. The language and format of such notification is subject to approval by the City. Each
disclosure statement shall be acknowledged with the signature of each property.
2. A deed notification shall be recorded to run with the property, stating that the uses permitted by this
project and adjacent properties have zoning which allows livestock and that dust, noise, and related
conditions may be experienced from time to time. The wording and format for notifying property
buyers is subject to approval by the City.
-23-
CHECK�,�s RESPONSES AND ENVIItONMEIN Q ANALYSIS
3. At the time of recordation of the first final map, the Applicant/Developer shall comply with any City
Council conservation programs established pursuant to General Plan Conservation Element Policy
1.1.4 in order to mitigate the potentially significant impact of the proposed project on the loss of
Prime Farmland.
4. Prior to issuance of certificates of occupancy and predicated on the sequence of development, the
perimeter of each development shall be appropriately buffered by fences, walls, and/or berms to
minimize conflicts between permanent residents,proposed non-residential uses,and agricultural uses.
5. Since a specific development scheme or site plan has not been prepared for the proposed PEC
Reserve area, any future projects anticipated within this non-residential zone and land use
designation shall be evaluated in the context of its design and the specific uses proposed in order to
determine consistency with its neighborhood-serving purpose and compatibility with the adjacent VL
uses.
6. Future development of residential uses within the project site, but outside of TSM 8226, shall be
reviewed using the standards approved for TSM 8226, unless a variance, or ordinance amendment is
approved by the Planning Commission.
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING (a and b)
The City's General Plan and zoning for the project site generally provides for the development of very-low density
residential uses. Because the area is-rural,the extension and improvement of infrastructure is required. However,the
existing land use designation of the project site and surrounding land infer that infrastructure for residential
development is planned and already has been or will be constructed. Therefore, the growth inducement impact of
this project is less than significant.
Based on a maximum density of three units per acre, a project site of approximately 171 acres would support 513
units or.1,437 residents (at 2.8 persons per household). By rezoning a portion of the project site (21 acres) and
limiting the number of units on the remaining 150.05 acres to 342, the maximum population generated by the project
is anticipated to be 958.
NON-RESIDENTIAL - The proposed change in land use of the 21 acres from Residential-Very Low Density to
non-residential uses consistent with the PEC zone would reduce the amount of the permanent population
anticipated. Development of the PEC Reserve will, in all likelihood, have an indirect impact on the area by
stimulating limited population growth in the surrounding area and daytime population as a consequence of
employment.
RESIDENTIAL
• TSM 8226: Since no residential units are located on the site, the proposed project would not result in the
displacement of any residential unit, affordable or otherwise. The proposed project would result in the
development of 245 new, low-density housing units. Although the proposed project would provide high-end
residential homes, it would increase the available supply of housing in Brentwood, expand the range of future
housing choices for home buyers, and presumably improve over all housing affordability by accommodating
move-up units thereby releasing middle income units that are already part of the available housing stock. At
build-out of 245 homes, TSM 8226 would have a total population of approximately 686 calculated at 2.8 persons
per household.
-24-
CHECKLIaT RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEN L ANALYSIS
• The remaining 66.05 acres of very-low density residential uses presumably would accommodate 97 units, or an
additional 68 units, in excess of the existing 29 residential homes. The existing population of this area, estimated
at approximately 87, is projected to reach 277.
The population projected for this site is within the holding capacity anticipated under the General Plan, and therefore,
would not result in a significant impact.
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS (a,b,c,f and h)
The site regionally is part of the San Francisco Bay Area and Sacramento-San Joaquin Rivers Delta which are
geologically active and subject to earth-changing events. The site is considered to be in one of the most seismically
active regions of the United States. The trace of the Marsh Creek Fault is situated proximately 10 miles west of the
subject site, and is considered active by the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones Act (1997). The Marsh Creek
Fault is considered a strike-slip fault with right-lateral movement. The subject site is not located within an AP
Earthquake Fault Zone or a Seismic Hazard Zone (1998).
The San Andreas Fault is located approximately 45 miles west of the project site. Other faults in the vicinity of
lesser or unknown activity are: 1) the northwest-trending Mount Diablo (approximately 9 miles southwest of the
project site), 2)the north-trending Antioch-Davis (approximately 3'/4 west of the project site), and 3)the Brentwood-
Sherman Island Faults(approximately 1'/4 miles west of the project site).
The project site would be susceptible to ground shaking of a moderate to high magnitude from any known fault in
the area. The seismic risk to.structures on the project site depends on the distance from the epicenter; the
characteristics of the earthquake;the geologic, groundwater, and soil conditions underlying structures on the project
site; and the nature of the construction.
The local topography of the site is relatively flat, but gently slopes and drains toward the northeast. The City of
Brentwood General Plan Final EIR (page 69) states that, in general, alluvial areas (Qal) found throughout the City
may be subject to liquefaction during a seismic event if perched groundwater conditions are present. The depth-to-
water beneath the project site appears to be 20 to 30 feet below ground surface. Localized groundwater appears to
flow toward the northeast. The degree of liquefaction potential will depend on groundwater conditions at specific
sites.
As with other sites in the area, an assumption can be made that the soils on the project site have slow permeability,
high shrink-swell potential, fair to good compaction characteristics, and medium to low shear strength. The
materials that underlie the project site consist of Holocene coarse-grained alluvium (Qhac) of unconsolidated,
moderately sorted, permeable stand and silt with coarse sand and gravel. The alluvium was deposited by flowing
water on stream levies and flood plains, primarily during flooding events. Deposits are probably 5,000 to 7,000
years old or older and have thickness from less than ten feet to as much as 50 feet.
Because of relatively.flat topography and cohesive nature of the soils, the potential for erosion on the project site is
less than significant if properly graded and drained.
The soils and geologic conditions backed by recent technical reports address only the portion of the project site
within TSM 8226. In view of geologic and geotechnical conditions, development of the residential uses within TSM
8226 would be feasible. Development of the PEC Reserve or other areas designated for very-low density residential
use would require subsequent geological studies and further analysis. As mentioned above, historical documents
indicate the presence of a sand and gravel mine on the Cunha property near the northeast portion of the project which
-25-
-i-AL ANALY
SIS
CHECK( ST RESPONSES AND ENviRONMEN
may have been backfilled with native soil materials and graded. Further investigation must be performed to identify
the presence or otherwise of the location and possible extent of such fill.
Mitigation Measures
The geotechnical hazards of the project site can be mitigated to a less than significant level by the following
mitigation measures:
7. Further geotechnical investigation must be performed to identify the presence or otherwise of the
possible location and extent of fill pertaining to past sand and gravel mining. Any undocumented fill
that is encountered shall be removed and replaced as engineered fill subject to approval of the City
Engineer.
S. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a final geologic and geotechnical feasibility study shall be
conducted for the project site along with any recommendations and remediations necessary to ensure
proper grading and construction design of public improvements, building foundations, retaining
walls,and drainage.
9. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, a Comprehensive Grading Plan shall be submitted to the City
Engineer which reflects the recommendations of the final Geotechnical Study. All recommendations
of the final Geotechnical Study and City Engineer shall be incorporated into the grading plan as a
condition of the project grading permit and verified in the field by the City Engineer or his
representative.
10. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for project development,the Applicant/Developer shall submit a
construction plan to.the City Engineer for approval which reflects the recommendations of a final
Geotechnical Study including construction procedures and/or design criteria. Construction plans
submitted to the City Engineer shall conform with the City of Brentwood Engineering Design
Standards and include specifications necessary to minimize potential impacts resulting from soils
conditions of the project site. The City Engineer or his representative shall verify in the field that all
conditions have been satisfied.
11. Additional geologic and geotechnical studies shall be performed by subsequent Applicants/Developers
which will address the site and soils conditions of the PEC Reserve area and the residential areas
outside of TSM 8226.
1V. WATER(a,b,c,d,e,f,g,h and i)
The project site overlies a portion of the San Joaquin Groundwater Basin encompassing about 30 square miles.
The project site is not part of or immediately adjacent to an identified wetland area. It currently is largely
undeveloped, and as such, it now provides an opportunity for groundwater system recharging via the percolation
of storm waters and irrigation. In addition,an existing drainage channel enters the project site at the southeasterly
edge (near the intersection of Lone Tree Way and Anderson Lane) and terminates at northerly boundary of the
project site.
Implementation of the proposed project will add impervious surfaces to the site, which will result in a net
decrease in absorption rates, a net increase in storm water runoff rates, and a change.to existing drainage patterns.
Development of the project site would reduce some permeable land area above the groundwater basin and
contribute to a cumulative loss of permeable land surface and irrigated agricultural land. . The general loss of
recharge would result in a gradual lowering of groundwater levels. However, development as very low-density
residential would add less impermeable surfaces than development at higher density residential. Also, due to the
-26-
CHECO, T RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEN.AL ANALYSIS
extremely small proportional size of the project site relative to the size of the groundwater basin, this impact is
considered less than significant.
Development of the proposed project would have the potential to lead to degradation of water quality. Water quality
impacts would have a short-term component, occurring during site construction, and a long-term component
occurring during the lifetime of the improvements.
Short-term grading and construction activities may cause an increase in erosion leading to sedimentation of streams
in the affected watershed. Pollutants also may be transported from construction areas to downstream locations due
to improper handling practices. The degree to which construction activities impact water quality is partially
determined by the time of year when the construction activity occurs.
Long-term occupancy of the project site by the proposed land uses would introduce non-point sources of
pollution such as fertilizers, pesticides, household chemicals, animal wastes, and automobile products within the
project area. These pollutants may be carried by storm water runoff to surface water bodies within or
downstream from the project site. Storm water pollution control is the responsibility of the State Water
Resources Control Board and Regional Water Quality Control Boards. Storm water pollution control is
implemented through the use of National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits, which are
applied to industries, municipalities, and construction activities. Any subsequent development activity
encompassing greater than five acres would be required to obtain the applicable NPDES permits. The project site
is not known to be located in any flood zone established by the National Flood Insurance Program. In addition,
the development of TSM 8226 will include improvements to the existing drainage system that will contribute
towards recharging groundwater supplies and enhance open space and recreational opportunities.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will mitigate identified ground water and drainage impacts to a
less than significant level:
12. Prior to issuance of Grading Permits, the Applicant/Developer shall submit to the City Engineer
for review and approval a Drainage Master Plan and measures to control quality of storm water
run-off. The plan shall describe how on-site draining systems will be designed to compensate for
the reduced water absorption capacity of the site and to prevent flooding of adjacent properties.
The plan must ensure that all storm water entering or originating within the project site shall be
conveyed, without diversion of the watershed, to the nearest adequate natural watercourse or
adequate man-made drainage facility.
13. Design of both the on-site and downstream drainage facilities shall meet with the approval of both
the City Engineer and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District.
The system shall drain to the storm drain system in the street.
14. Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Drainage fees for Drainage
Area shall be paid prior to filing of the Final Map.
15. A National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) construction permit shall be obtained
for any disturbance of more than five acres.
16. All future development on the project site shall comply with specific NPDES requirements.
17. A perpetual maintenance funding mechanism, funded entirely by the Applicant/Developer or
subsequent homeowners group,and maintenance agreement for any detention basin and/or private
-27-
CHECKf X RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI�`�-�-�L ANALYSIS
facilities shall be in place and approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of related
improvement plans.
18. Roof drains shall empty onto paved areas,' concrete swales, other approved dissipating devices
(including landscape swales),or into a pipe.
19. Concentrated drainage flows shall not be permitted to cross sidewalks or driveways.
20. The Applicant/Developer shall ensure that each lot or parcel shall drain into a street, public drain,
or approved private drain in such a manner that there will be no undrained depression.
Satisfaction of this measure shall be subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
21. The Developer/Applicant for TSM 8226 shall install a system to utilize non-potable water from the
City of Brentwood's Tertiary Treatment Plant to irrigate Parcels A, C, D, E, and F. The
referenced parcels all are landscaped spaces for public use or rights-of-way.
V. AIR QUALITY(a,b and c)
Brentwood is part of the San Francisco Bay Area airshed, which is dominated by the strength and position of the
semi-permanent, high-pressure center over the Pacific Ocean near Hawaii. It creates cool summers, mild winters,
and generally infrequent rainfall. Brentwood is located on the southern shore of the San Joaquin River Delta east of
the Carquinez Strait. This area generally is well ventilated by winds flowing through the Carquinez Strait and Delta.
The area is exposed to winds from both the east and west,and the terrain provides little protection from the wind.
Air quality within the region comes under the jurisdiction of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District
(BAAQMD). The District's closest meteorological monitoring stations are at Bethel Island and Pittsburg. At the
Pittsburg station, the predominant wind is from the west, with the secondary predominant wind from the south-
southwest at 9.3 miles per hour. During the winter, the predominant wind is from the east-southeast, and during the
summer,the predominant wind is from the west. Predominant summer winds play a role in the distribution of ozone
and ozone precursors. Several components of the airshed as measured at those stations exceed established Federal
and State standards, including those for ozone and particulate matter of 10-micron diameter or less(PM-10).
Although wind ventilation may reduce the concentration of atmospheric pollutants, Brentwood is susceptible to
pollution transported from more heavily urbanized areas to the west. Warm summer temperatures in the.Brentwood
area contribute to the formation of ozone from hydrocarbons and nitrogen oxides produced in Oakland and Berkeley.
Portions of the project site are vacant, formerly in agricultural use,while other portions remain in agricultural use.
Pollutant generation from the project site is variable and sporadic depending on the intensity and type of activities
occurring and the phasing of development. On-site emissions associated with the current and previous uses
include combustion products from burning of agricultural waste and operation of agricultural equipment,
particulate matter from tilling, and the evaporation of hydrocarbons from pesticide application. The reduction or
phase-out of agricultural uses in the area actually may reduce the over all total suspended particulates generated
in the area during cultivation operations. However, construction-related air quality impacts would occur with
development of future projects, both residential and non-residential, and related infrastructure improvements.
Clearing and earth-moving activities would comprise the major source of construction dust emissions. Impacts
would be due to dust generated by construction equipment and vehicles. Fugitive dust would be emitted both
during construction activities and as a result of wind erosion over exposed earth.surfaces. As development is
being completed mobile sources of emissions would be generated by automobile and small truck traffic accessing
the new development which would result in emissions increases affecting both local and regional air quality. The
-28-
CHECK1 RESPONSES AND ENviRoNmEEN G ANALYSIS
local effect would be increased carbon monoxide, reactive organic gasses, nitrogen oxide, sulfur dioxide, and
particulate matter(PM-10)levels along roadways used by the project traffic.
NON-RESIDENTIAL: Since the nature of the proposed PEC Reserve is unknown at this time, additional analysis
would need to be conducted concerning air-quality impacts created by or affecting the project site.
RESIDENTIAL: Direct air quality impacts from residential development of the project site would result from
emissions released on-site from stationary sources which include space and water heating equipment, fireplaces,
barbecues, paints and solvents, lawnmowers,and volatile consumer products.
The development of the project generally would contribute to cumulative ozone concentration increases. However,
any decrease in oxygen-generating capacity due to the removal of agricultural uses would be offset by landscape
materials installed as part of the project.
Mitigation Measures
In order to reduce the potential adverse air quality impacts to a less than significant level, the following mitigation
measures shall be required for development of the project:
22. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant/Developer shall prepare an Erosion
Prevention and Dust Control Plan. The plan shall be followed by the project's grading contractor
and submitted to the Public Services Department, which will be responsible for field verification of
the plan during construction. The plan shall comply with the City's grading ordinance and shall
include the following control measures and other measures deemed by the Public Services
Department to be necessary for the proposed project:
a. A graveled track at project entryways to remove mud and dirt from vehicles leaving the site shall
be provided.
b. Water (or an acceptable soil binder chemical) shall be applied to all disturbed earth surfaces
(including earth roads and soil stockpiles). Surface material shall be sufficiently watered to
prevent excessive amounts of dust. Watering shall occur at least twice per day with complete
coverage,preferably in the late morning and at the completion of work for the day.
c. Permanent soil stabilization measures shall be implemented throughout each phase of
construction prior to commencement of grading on successive phases.
d. All clearing, grading, earth moving, and excavation shall stop during periods of high winds
greater than 20 mph over one hour.
e. All material transported off-site shall either be sufficiently watered or securely covered to prevent
escape of dust and debris.
f. On-site vehicle speed shall be limited to 15 mph.
g. During rough grading and construction, adjacent public and private roads shall be swept at least
once per day,or as required by the City,to remove silt and construction debris.
h. Unnecessary idling of construction equipment shall be avoided.
-29-
CHECKDRESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEt�Ii�`�ANALYSIS
�iiis Equipment engines shall be maintained in proper working condition per manufacturers'
specifications.
j. During periods of heavier air pollution (May to October), the construction period shall be
lengthened to minimize the amount of equipment operating at one time.
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION(a,b,c,d,a and f)
The City of Brentwood's General Plan envisions the growth of the City through the year 2010. The Circulation
Element was based on trip generation projections and includes a corresponding transportation system design to
adequately accommodate the movement of vehicles. That system includes a hierarchical roadway system with
different classifications designed to carry traffic generated by planned development.
The City of Brentwood's acceptance standard is Level of Service(LOS)D for signalized intersections and a volume
to capacity ratio(v/c) of.84. LOS A indicates free flow conditions with little or no delay, and LOS F indicates
jammed conditions with excessive delays and long back-ups. The City does not have criteria for unsignalized
(stationary stop) intersections.
A traffic study was completed for the proposed project. It analyzed four scenarios and five intersections in addition
to the circulation and parking requirements specific to TSM 8226. The proposed project analyzed by the traffic
study corresponds to the proposed project for this Initial Study and Negative Declaration. That is: 342 single family
detached residential units and approximately 226,500 square feet of non-residential uses. The study's approach was
to determine if any nearby intersections are projected to operate at worse than Level of Service (LOS) D and to
determine the mitigation measures necessary not to exceed that level.
The traffic study indicated that, at build-out,the proposed project would generate 12,994 trips daily—3,273 trips for
the 342 units and 9,721 for the non-residential uses. The four scenarios analyzed are:
1. Existing Conditions
2. Existing Conditions+previously approved projects
3. Existing Conditions+previously approved projects+the proposed project
4. Cumulative Conditions(2010), including the proposed project+projected development
Previously approved projects under Scenario 2 include 228 single-family units, a 12-pump gas station, and 2,526
square feet of commercial space. Scenario 4 based its assumptions on the East County Transportation Models
developed by the Contra Costa Transit Authority(CCTA)and Contra Costa County.
The five intersections analyzed by the traffic study are:
1. Neroly Road/O'Hara Avenue—northwest corner of the project site
2. Lone Tree Way/Empire Avenue—about a half mile west of the project site
3. Lone Tree Way/Fairview Avenue—about a quarter mile west of the project site
4. Lone Tree Way and O'Hara Avenue—southwest corner of the project site
5. Lone Tree Way/Brentwood Boulevard(State Route 4)—about a quarter mile east of the project site.
Under Scenario 1, it was determined that all five intersections operate at an acceptable LOS and no further
improvements would be needed at any of the five intersections. This scenario also assumes that signalization
improvements in progress for the intersection at Lone Tree Way/Empire Avenue will be complete allowing it to
operate at LOS A and LOS B during the a.m.and p.m.peak hours, respectively.
-30-
CHECK` IT RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI0AL ANALYSIS
Under Scenario 3, it was determined that the Lone Tree Way/O'Hara Avenue intersection would warrant a signal.
However, it could function with a 4-way stop and modifications to the lane configurations to meet LOS B and LOS
C during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours,respectively. Neither street would need to be widened.
Under Scenario 4, it was determined that four of the five intersections would require further mitigation measures to
operate at an acceptable LOS. The Neroly Road/O'Hara Avenue intersection would not warrant signalization.
However, to operate at an acceptable LOS, this intersection would require improvements to the Lone Tree
Way/O'Hara intersection described above, and Lone Tree Way would need to be modified to carry four lanes of
traffic between O'Hara and Brentwood Boulevard. In addition, Lone Tree Way would need to be widened to six
lanes, or to four lanes with a median lane for turning movements,between O'Hara and Empire Avenue.
The City's Traffic Engineer re-examined the traffic impacts from this project by"pulling out"the PEC Reserve Area
for which there is no definitive project at this time. This was done to determine if under Scenario 4, the O'Hara
Avenue / Lone Tree Way intersection would need to be signalized due to the construction of TSM 8226. This
analysis resulted in the traffic volumes (during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours) still being high enough to warrant
signalization of this intersection as a result of the development of this project and other projects approved, but not yet
built. Consequently, the implementation of TSM 8226 should require that the O'Hara Avenue / Lone Tree Way
intersection be signalized.
General standards for residential subdivisions should be designed as follows in order to facilitate comer sight
distance and minimize vehicle conflicts:
a) Driveways on corner lots should be as far from the corner as possible.
b) There should be at least 25 feet between driveways to allow for safe on-street parking.
c) On-street parking should be prohibited at least 20 feet from an intersection, and
d) Perpendicular parking should be prohibited at the end of cul-de-sacs.
TSM 8226-Access to this portion of the project site will be taken from one point on the west side of the
subdivision at O'Hara Avenue("A"Street)and two points on the east side of the subdivision at Anderson Lane
("X"and"W' Streets). No access will be taken from the north or the south. The Traffic Study proposes
eliminating the access point on Anderson Lane north of"W"Street that aligns with Almond Avenue. It suggests
that if a second access point is necessary from Anderson Lane, a better location would have it align with De
Fremery south of the Almond Avenue/Anderson Lane P'W'Street intersection. These streets also will provide
access for emergency vehicles upon completion of the improvements.
The subdivision map identifies a possible future connection between "U"P'W'Streets and Bonnie Lane,an
existing privately-owned access road that runs east-west, intersecting at O'Hara Avenue and serving the
properties south of TSM 8226. This connection would require a span over the existing flood control channel.
The map also shows a proposed extension of"L" Street south of TSM 8226 which would intersect with Bonnie
Lane. Until residential development occurs on those properties south of TSM 8226 and street dedication occurs,
easements would need to be obtained from the current owners allowing access by the residential occupants of
TSM 8226. In any case, measures should be required from the Applicant/Developer of TSM 8226 allowing
construction of these connections at a future date with provisions to reimburse the Applicant/Developer the pro
rata amount from future adjacent developments.
NON-RESIDENTIAL: Since the nature of the proposed PEC Reserve is unknown at this time, no specific
recommendations concerning traffic and circulation impacts are proposed at this time.
The Applicants/Developers within the project site will be required to contribute to the construction of the State Route
4 Bypass Project, a planned regional facility, as well as other planned local facilities. In conclusion, the proposed
-31-
CHECKSJ RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMENC ANALYSIS
project is consistent with future development levels planned in this part of Brentwood which have been included in
the county regional transportation models.
Mitigation Measures
In order to reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level,the following traffic and circulation mitigation
measures shall be required for development of the project site as part of the City's project review process:
23. The Applicant/Developer shall pay applicable thoroughfare facility fees (plus any annual increase) in
effect at the time of building permit issuance and shall participate in the City's Capital Improvement
Financing Plan (CIFP) to finance necessary roadway infrastructure, with consideration of
improvements to Lone Tree Way and the intersections of Lone Tree Way with O'Hara Avenue,
Empire Avenue,and Brentwood Boulevard.
24. The Applicant/Developer shall submit an access plan that is in conformance with standards
established by the City of Brentwood.
25. The Applicant/Developer shall notify homebuyers that ownership and maintenance of facilities or
improvements owned by the homeowners association, if any (including any on-site roads, easements,
common area,and facilities),will be the association's responsibility.
26. The Applicant/Developer shall make local and regional rideshare and transit information available to
all homebuyers and employees.
In addition to the mitigation measures listed above, the Applicant/Developer of TSM 8226 shall comply with the
following:
27. The O'Hare Avenue./Lone Tree Way intersection shall be signalized in a manner determined by the
City Engineer.
28. The Applicant/Developer of TSM 8226 shall incorporate traffic calming measures to discourage cut-
through traffic on "A" Street, "R" Street, "X" Street, and "W" Street. In an effort to reduce cut-
through traffic, stop signs shall be required throughout the subdivision as approved by the City of
Brentwood, Engineering Department. Unless otherwise specified, stop signs shall be located at the
following intersections:
• Intersection of"A" Street with "D" Street and "E" Street
• Intersection of"A" Street with "G" Street and "L" Street
0 Intersection of"A" Street with "R" Street and "K" Street
• Intersection of"R" Street with "X" Street and "T" Street
Intersection of"L" Street with "M" Street and "N" Street
• Intersection of"L" Street with "O" Street and "P" Street
29. To improve on-site and off-site circulation, the Applicant/Developer of TSM 8226 shall construct a
"L" Street in such manner that street extension at a future date would connect it with Bonnie Lane.
"U" Street and "W" Street also shall be constructed in such a manner that street extension at a
future date would connect "U" Street and "W" Street with Bonnie Lane. The Applicant/Developer of
TSM 8226 shall construct the span over the flood control channel at this connection with provisions
for reimbursement from adjacent residential developers at a later date for their pro rata share of the
expenses.
-32-
CHECKuq.Z, RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI\ dI.ANALYSIS
30. The Applicant/Developer for TSM 8226 shall minimize parking on Street "A" to facilitate the trail
crossing and traffic calming.
31. The Applicant/Developer shall construct a bus turnout at the intersection of O'Hara Avenue and "A"
Street behind parcels 4,5 and 6.
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES(b)
The draw and consumption of non-renewable fossil fuels is of general concern in terms of long-range planning
and economic policies. Fluctuations and shocks in the global supply of crude oil have prompted research,
policies, and the development of technology which address conservation and alternatives to the use of fossil fuels.
However, as such alternatives currently are available on a limited basis, they often are not used to meet most daily
residential energy needs, or they are used only occasionally for non-residential uses when cost-benefit studies
indicate substantial savings in operating expenses.
Recent advances in energy-efficient technologies have resulted in high efficiency heating and air conditioning
systems, building materials, lighting systems, and manufacturing controls and equipment. California already has an
advanced energy use building code in its Title 24 residential building standards. Title 24 requires builders to meet
specified energy performance standards based on local climate conditions and building type.
NON-RESIDENTIAL - Since the nature of the proposed PEC development is unknown at this time, additional
analysis would need to be conducted when more specific information becomes available concerning impacts on
energy consumption.
RESIDENTIAL - The ultimate build-out of the project site will result in 342 single family detached homes
which will house approximately 958 persons. This increase in population will result in new energy demands
to meet anticipated daily energy needs. These demands, most likely, will be met through consumption of
nonrenewable fossil fuels. Direct air quality impacts from residential development of the project site would
result from emissions released on-site from stationary sources which include space and water heating equipment,
fireplaces, barbecues, paints and solvents, lawnmowers, and volatile consumer products. A single-family
dwelling that includes high efficiency heating and air conditioning equipment, improved insulation levels, low
emissivity glazing, and solar water heating may reduce energy consumption to a fraction of allowable levels. In
addition, innovative technologies such as shading, district heating and cooling systems, and passive solar design
may reduce energy requirements even more. These technologies currently are available and in use nation-wide.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required to ensure that nonrenewable resources are used conservatively and
efficiently to reduce energy-use impacts resulting from the proposed project to less than significant levels:
32. The Applicant/Developer shall consult with the selected energy provider(s) for assistance with energy
conservation features to reduce per capita energy demand for residential uses and per cubic foot
energy demand for non-residential structures within the City of Brentwood.
33. Development of the project site shall include energy-efficient features including but not limited to:
orientation of the structures to summer and winter sunlight to absorb winter solar heat and reflect or
avoid summer solar-heat, thermal insulation of the walls and attic which meets or exceeds local
standards, weather stripping of windows and doors to decrease heat loss, solar assisted domestic hot
water and pool heating, tinted or solar reflective double glazing, overhangs on southern elevations,
and vegetation on western elevations to provide shading from summer sun.
-33-
CHECKL T RESPONSES AND ENVIRON mEJ.L ANALYSIS
34. Energy-efficient street lighting (low-pressure sodium vapor lights) shall be utilized to reduce power
plant air pollutant emissions.
35. All housing units developed on the project site shall include communication wiring which facilitates
efficient personal computer operation to enable future residents to work from home, access services,
or accomplish tasks thereby reducing auto trips and related mobile source emissions resulting from
the project.
36. All non-residential buildings shall be constructed to utilize energy-efficiency measures in design,
materials,and operating equipment.
IX. HAZARDS(a,c and d)
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) was conducted for TSM 8226. It includes a review of primary .
contamination sources.! It indicates that no hazardous waste or Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) have ever been
present on this portion of the project site. A review of secondary contamination sources indicates that one potential
secondary contamination site is located .29-mile from the site at 2650 Virginia Drive, Brentwood. One UST
previously was in service on that site. Since this secondary contamination site is situated down-gradient from the
project site, the possible contamination of groundwater beneath the property by this secondary source is highly
unlikely. The field examination in this ESA indicates that a gas station not shown in secondary sources is less than
.25 mile northeast of the site and would be another possible source of contamination. However, since this gas station
also is down-gradient from the project site, it most likely would not be a threat if the UST's were to leak.
With exception of the information discovered on the sand and gravel mining operation, historical evidence indicates
the project site always has been in agricultural.production for at least 30 years, generally as orchards or row-crops.
During that time, pesticides have been applied to the crops from time to time. Small residual amounts of DDE, a
metabolized variant of DDT, have been detected in other agricultural areas in Brentwood. Metal and organochloride
pesticides also may have been applied to the site in the past.
The ESA did not sample the soils for the presence of these chemicals. The development of the project site for
residential and recreational uses would result in some direct contact with topsoil material (e.g. through yard
maintenance, gardening, recreational activities, etc.). A specific chemical analysis should be conducted to ensure
that any DDE and DDT, if detected, are below any total threshold limit concentration values established for
hazardous substances.
Since the nature of development for the proposed PEC Reserve and other residential projects is unknown at this time,
additional analysis would need to be conducted when more specific information becomes available to assess
potential impacts created by the proposed project or that would result in hazards to the occupants of the project site
or surrounding uses.
Mitigation Measures
In order to reduce the potential impacts to a less than significant level, the following mitigation measures are
required:
37. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, Applicant/Developer shall conduct a soils analysis, including a
subsurface environmental investigation, to detect if the project site contains any residue of
agricultural pesticides,such as DDE and DDT,and if detected,shall ensure that such levels are below
any total threshold limit concentration values established for hazardous materials.
-34-
CHECI{L:. RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI\ ANALYSIS
38. Based on the past use of the site for agricultural purposes, composite soil samples should be collected
according to the Contra Costa County Department of Environmental Health (CCCDEH) pre-
approved sampling protocol. The composite soil samples should be submitted to a state certified
hazardous waste testing laboratory and analyzed for metals, arsenic, lead, Mercury, and
organochlorine pesticides using EPA series 6000/7008 and 8080.
X. NOISE(a and b)
Noise impacts that can be expected with future development of the project site include: increased levels of traffic
and associated noise on the surrounding streets (O'Hara Avenue, Lone Tree Way, Anderson Lane, and the eventual
extension of Neroly Road), noise impacts associated with the future State Highway 4 Bypass, traffic-related noise
generated from new roadways, short-term construction-related noise of surrounding new development, and
continued noise from agricultural operations prior to urbanization of properties in the vicinity.
Since the nature of the proposed PEC Reserve is unknown at this time, additional analysis would need to be
conducted when more specific information becomes available to assess potential noise impacts resulting from the
proposed project or impacting the occupants of the project site or surrounding uses.
Mitigation Measures
In order to reduce the potential noise impacts of the project to a less than significant level, the following mitigation
measures shall be required as a part of the City's project review process:
39. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 A.M. am to 3:30 P.M. on weekdays and
9:00 A.M. am to 3:30 P.M. on Saturdays. Construction shall be prohibited on Sundays. These
criteria shall be included in the grading plan submitted by the Applicant/Developer for review and
approval to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of grading
permits.
40. All construction equipment shall use properly operating mufflers,and no combustion equipment such
as pumps or generators shall be allowed to operate within 500 feet of any occupied residence during
construction hours, unless the equipment is surrounded by a noise protection barrier. These criteria
shall be included in the grading plan submitted by the Applicant/Developer for review and approval
to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director prior to issuance of grading permits.
41. Homes shall be designed with acoustical control measures to control interior noise levels in
accordance with the City's Noise element of the General Plan,the City's Municipal Code,and Title 24
standards.
M. PUBLIC SERVICES(a,b,c,d and e)
In general, the proposed project will add to the over all demand for public services. This increase is considered a
potentially significant impact. Also, depending upon the ultimate development of the non-residential portion of the
project site, further analysis will need to be conducted to assess impacts on demands for public services when more
specific information becomes available.
-35-
CHECK 'RESPONSES AND ENVIRONME. !,ANALYSIS
Police and Fire Protection
The project site is within the service area of the Brentwood Police Department and the East Diablo Fire Protection
District. Implementation of the proposed project will add to the over all demand for police and fire protection
services. This increase is considered a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will mitigate potential fire and police protection impacts to less
than significant levels:
.42. The Applicant/Developer shall participate in a Capital Improvement Financing Program.
43. The Police Department shall be included in the design review process for the proposed project in
order to ensure that the site plan incorporates appropriate crime prevention features.
44. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Uniform Fire Code and
the adopted policies of the East Diablo Fire Protection District (EDFPD). The Applicant/Developer
shall provide the number and type of hydrants called for. by EDFPD. Hydrant locations will be
determined by the EDFPD prior to issuance of encroachment and/or building permits.
45. Provide an adequate and reliable water supply for fire protection with a minimum fire flow of 1,000
gallons per minute (GPn. The required fire flow shall be delivered from not more than one fire
hydrant flowing simultaneously while maintaining 20 pounds of residual pressure in the main. (UFC
903.2)
46. Provide access roadways with all-weather driving surfaces of not less than 36 feet unobstructed width,
and not less than 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance, to within 150 feet of travel distance to all
portions of the exterior walls of every building.
47. Access roads shall not exceed 16 percent grade, shall have a minimum outside turning radius of 32
feet,and must be capable of supporting imposed loads of fire apparatus (20 tons).(UFC 902.2)
48. Access roads and hydrants shall be installed and in service prior to combustible construction. (UFC
8704.1)
49. Approved premises identification shall be provided. Such numbers shall contrast with their
background and be readily visible from the street. (UFC 901.4.4)
50. All residential structures shall have roof coverings with a minimum Class C rating. Untreated wood
or shake shingles are not allowed. (CCR Title 24, 1503)
51. All homes shall be protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system with two sets of plans
submitted to the East Diablo Fire Protection District for review and approval prior to installation.
This mitigation was removed by the Brentwood Planning Commission at its meeting on November 16,
1999.
52. In addition to the mitigation measures listed above, the Applicant/Developer for TSM 8226 shall
comply with the following:
-36-
CHECk (Jr RESPONSES AND ENviRoNME. ,•ANALYSIS
a. Provide 32 fire hydrants of the East Bay type. Hydrant locations will be determined by East
Diablo Fire Protection District upon submittal of three copies of a tentative map or site plan.
(UFC 903.4)
b. The Applicant/Developer shall provide traffic signal preemption systems (Opticom) at all
intersections, as applicable, which are signalized per City of Brentwood requirements for this
subdivision.
53. Prior to issuance of encroachment and/or building permits for improvements, . the
Applicant/Developer (and all subsequent property owners/homeowners) shall submit plans and
specifications to the East Diablo Fire Protection District and the City Engineer for review and
approval in accordance with codes, regulations, and ordinances administered by the East Diablo Fire
Protection District and the State Fire Marshal's office.
Schools
The project site is located within the Liberty Union High School District and the Brentwood Union Elementary
School District. The increased development of single-family residential units will add to the demand for services
provided by both Districts. Many of the elementary schools in the district are at or nearing capacity and are staying
under capacity only by the use of portable classrooms. The City's General Plan identifies the project site as a
potential location for an elementary school site. However, since adoption of the General Plan,the school district has
indicated that an elementary school site is not desired at this location. In any case, implementation of the proposed
project will result in a potentially significant impact related to schools.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measure will mitigate potential school impacts to a less than significant
level:
54. Prior to issuance of any residential building permit, the Applicant/Developer shall submit to the
Community Development Director written proof from the Liberty Union High School District and the
Brentwood Union Elementary School District indicating that appropriate school mitigation fees have
been paid.
Maintenance of Public Facilities
Development of the project site will require the City to maintain newly constructed public infrastructure (streets and
right-of-way, sewer, water, etc.). Since the General Plan provides for development of the project site and
surrounding area, the proposed project by itself would contribute only incrementally to increasing public facility
maintenance needs in relation to the over all planned development of the City. Impacts are partially mitigated by the
collection of a facility fee due at the time of issuance of building permits. Therefore, any increased demand for
maintenance of public facilities is anticipated to be less than significant,and no mitigation is required.
Other Governmental Services
Development of the project site will add new residents to the City of Brentwood, generally increasing the need for.
general governmental services. Since the General Plan provides for development of the project site and surrounding
area, the proposed project by itself would contribute only incrementally to increasing the need for other or general
governmental services in relation to the over all planned development of the City. Impacts are partially mitigated by
the collection of a facility fee due at the time of issuance of building permits. Therefore, any increased demand for
-37-
CHECK RESPONSES AND ENVIRONME- ANALYSIS
maintenance of other governmental services is anticipated to be less than significant,and no further mitigation would
be required.
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS(a,b,c,e, f and g)
The proposed project will require the installation and/or extension of utility lines for water, sewer, electricity, natural
gas, telephone, and cable television. Adequate capacity to serve the proposed project is or should be available
provided sufficient improvement fees are provided by the Applicant/Developer in conjunction with the City's Capital
Improvements Funding Program.
Mitigation Measures
In order to reduce the potential utility and service system impacts to a less than significant level, the following
mitigation measures shall be required as part of the City's project review process:
55. The Applicant/Developer shall be required to connect to the existing Brentwood utility network as
well as pay all applicable fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Improvement plans
indicating conformance to City of Brentwood Standards shall be.prepared, submitted, and approved
by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of encroachment permits for any new development.
XIII. AESTHETICS (a,b and c)
Given the agricultural and rural residential uses currently on the project site,development of suburban residential and
PEC uses would represent a major transformation of the existing visual environment from its present appearance.
Under the current use, or as vacant, very little light or glare is emitted from the project site. Development of the
proposed project will result in an increase-in night time light and glare associated with suburban residential activity
or create the potential for light and glare from outdoor areas, such as parking lots, for the proposed non-residential
uses.
For residential uses, light and glare from second-story windows may affect other occupants within the project site
and surrounding area. The change in use from rural residential and agriculture to suburban residential and Planned
Employment Center is, by itself, a potentially significant impact. However, the very low-density of the proposed
residential portion of the project is less than the degree of impacts resulting from other urban and suburban uses.
Since the nature of the proposed PEC Reserve is unknown at this time, additional analysis would need to be
conducted when more specific information becomes available to assess potential aesthetic impacts resulting from the
proposed project or impacting the occupants of the project site or surrounding uses. The impacts associated with a
change in use from agricultural to low-density residential have been addressed previously with the General Plan
.Final EIR. Also, the proposed change in planned use for a portion of the project site from very-low density
residential to uses consistent with the PEC zone is compatible and necessary for serving the'pattern of development
taking place on property surrounding the project site.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measures will mitigate potential aesthetic impacts to a less than
significant level:
56. In conjunction with development of the project site, the Applicant/Developer shall shield all on-site
lighting so that it is directed within the project site and does not illuminate adjacent properties. A
Street Lighting Plan shall be approved by the Engineering Department prior to approval of the Final
-38-
CHECK ('RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI (J ANALYSIS
Tract Map. The shielded light fixtures shall be reviewed and approved by the Community
Development Department prior to issuance of building permits.
57. Uniform Building Code compliance shall be assumed to reduce glare to an insignificant level.
Through the Design Review process, second floor windows should be designed to minimize potential
sun glare from adjacent properties by use of landscape or structural impediments.
58. The Applicant/Developer shall submit a lighting plan, subject to approval of the Community
Development Director,which addresses the nighttime lighting within the proposed subdivision.
59. If sound walls are found necessary, they shall be aesthetically designed for consistency with the
proposed development. Walls shall be located in landscaped buffers along road frontages and
designed with frequent offsets, variations in texture and material, occasional visual openings, and
architecture that is complementary to the buildings on site. Walls may be constructed atop variable
height berms to reduce visual monotony. Shrubs and vines shall be planted along the walls to soften
surfaces and deter the potential for graffiti. Street trees shall be planted in landscaped buffers to
create visual breaks and interest against expanses of hardscape material.
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES (a and b)
Other than the agricultural heritage of the community, Native American archaeological sites would be another
cultural resource potentially disrupted by the proposed project. Based on information contained in several previously
prepared environmental documents for proposed development within Brentwood, Native American archaeological
sites in this area of Contra Costa County tend to be located at the base of hills and on stream terraces near former or
existing water courses.
No archeological evidence has been observed on the project site. However, such artifacts may exist below the
surface, and as such, it is possible that paleontological and/or archaeological resources may be uncovered during the
construction phase which might cause the proposed project to result in a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures
Implementation of the following mitigation measure will mitigate potential impacts on cultural resources to a less
than significant level:
60. Prior to issuance of.grading permits, the Applicant/Developer shall submit plans to the Community
Development Department for review and approval which indicate (via notation on the improvement
plans) that if cultural resources are encountered during site grading or other site work, all such work
shall be halted immediately within the area of discovery and the Applicant/Developer shall
immediately notify the Community Development Department of the discovery. In such case, the
Applicant/Developer shall be required, at his expense, to retain the services of a qualified
archaeologist for the purpose of recording, protecting,or curating the discovery as appropriate. The
archaeologist shall be required to submit to the Community Development Department for review and
approval a report of the findings and method of curation or protection of the resources. No further
grading or site work within the area of discovery will be allowed until the proceeding work has
occurred.
-39-
CHECK RESPONSES AND ENVIRONMEI (J"ALYSIS
XV. RECREATION(a and b)
Development of the project site will result in new residents from the residential development and increased daytime
population from the non-residential uses. Consequently, demand will increase for neighborhood, community, and
regional parks and other recreational facilities. In addition to the 12.83 acres of neighborhood park and recreational
trail system provided by TSM 8226, additional acreage is proposed to be developed extending the trail system along
the flood control right-of-way between this subdivision and Lone Tree Way. The proposed development of the
neighborhood parks and trail systems will add to the City's inventory of recreational and open space, provide an on-
site recreational resource to serve the occupants of the project site, and absorb some of the demand on other city and
county recreational facilities.
Mitigation Measures
In addition to the neighborhood parks, new residents can be expected to utilize community and regional parks, as
well as other recreational amenities in the area. Implementation of the following mitigation measure will mitigate
potential impacts to a less than significant level:
61. Prior to issuance of occupancy permits, the Applicant/Developer shall be required to pay the
appropriate Quimby Act fees and/or dedicate the necessary park and trail acreage.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE (a,b,c and d)
Development of rural areas to urban/suburban uses may be regarded as achieving short-term goals to the
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. However, the inevitable impacts resulting from population and
economic growth are mitigated by long-range planning to establish policies, programs, and measures for the
efficient and economical use of resources. Long-term environmental goals, both broad and specific, have been
addressed previously in several environmental documents, the most comprehensive being the General Plan Final
EIR certified in 1993.
The loss of prime agricultural land is considered a "cumulatively considerable impact" and a "substantial adverse
impact," both direct and indirect, which were addressed with the General Plan Final EIR. Other cumulative
impacts may be identified in the categories of population growth, use of resources, demand for services, and
physical changes to the natural environment. These impacts may be mitigated to a degree through mitigation
measures cumulatively applied as development occurs, or they have been considered subject to findings of
overriding benefit by the lead agency.
-40-
ONVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 10
City of Brentwood,General Plan 1993 -2010
City of Brentwood,Park and Recreation Master Plan dated August 21, 1994
Carlson, Barbee & Gibson, Inc., Map entitled "Subdivision 8226, Condon & Cunha Properties, Tentative Map"
dated October 20, 1999
Terrasearch, Inc., "Phase I, Environmental Assessment on Proposed Residential Development - Anderson Lane,
Brentwood,California"dated August 13, 1998
Terrasearch, Inc., "Feasibility Evaluation, Proposed Residential Development, Anderson Lane, Brentwood, CA'
dated September 23, 1998.
The Planning Center, City of Brentwood General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report Volumes One and Twq
July 1993
TJKM Transportation Consultants, "Traffic Study for the O'Hara Avenue/Neroly Road Property, Tract No.
8226"dated September 28, 1999
-41-
J uL-10.7-eUUI iD•41 1.l 1 i ur Draw i wuuw r.we-, 4 7
• l
~ RESOLUTION NO. 99-253
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD
APPROVING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND A GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT(GPA 99-2) ON 21+ACRES FROM VERY LOW
DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(VL)TO OFFICE BUSINESS (OB)FOR PROPERTY
LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LONE TREE WAY AND O'X4RA
AVENUE(APN 018-060-006, 007, 050 AND 051).
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested that the City amend the General Plan to change the
General Plan Land Use Plan Designation from Very Low Density Residential (VL) to Office
Business(OB)on 21+ acres of land generally located at the northeast corner of Lone Tree Way and
O'Hara Avenue as shown on Exhibit A,hereby made a part of this resolution; and
WHEREAS, the applicants has also requested City review and approval of a rezoning
amendment and tentative subdivision map to accommodate a 245-lot single family subdivision;
and i
WHEREAS, the environmental effects of this proposed action have been addressed in a
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and all potentially adverse impacts have been conditioned to
render the impact to a level of less than significant; and
WHEREAS, on November 16, 1999,the Planning Commission recommended approval of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and the General Plan Land Use Plan Amendment (GPA 99-2) by
passing Resolution 99-46;and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public heating was advertised in the Contra Costa Times
December 3, 1999, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the
site as required by City Ordinance and Government Code See. 65090;and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brentwood held a public hearing on the proposed
General Plan Amendment on December 14, 1999, for the purpose of reviewing said amendment,
The Planning Commission recommendation, and considered all comments made by the public
testimony with respect to this proposed General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, after the close of the public heating, the City Council considered all public !
comments received both before and during the public hearing, the presentation by City staff, the
staff report, which includes an analysis of the consistency of the proposed project with all other
goals and policies of the City and the General Plan, and all other pertinent goals, policies,
regulations and documents regarding the proposed amendment; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brentwood makes the following supporting
findings for this application as required by the City's General Plan:
JUL-b:l-�1Jb1 1J �1G 1.1 ur Dr�cv i wuvL �.-� ��.• - -••- •-- --
City Council Resolution No.99-253 ....1
Page 2
1. The proposed amendment has been processed in accordance with the applicable
provisions of the California Government Code and the California Environmental
Quality Act.
2. The proposed amendment is deemed to be in the public interest because the requested
land use change further the City's overall goal of balancing jobs and housing.
3. The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with other goals, policies and
implementation programs set forth in the General Plan which are intended to create a
balance between jobs and housing units and is internally consistent with all other
General Plan Elements.
4. The potential impacts of the proposed amendment have been assessed and have been
determined not to be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare.
5. Pursuant to Section 15168(c) and 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council
finds that the Project is within the scope of the development levels evaluated in the
Program EIR prepared for the 1993 City of Brentwood General Plan- The Initial Study
has further evaluated potential project specific impacts to the environment. Based upon
this evidence and the Mitigated Negative Declaration, this City Council finds that the
Project will not have any significant environmental impacts that were not studied in the
Program EIR. The Mitigated Negative Declaration applies all applicable mitigation
measures specified in the Program EIR to the Project and imposes additional mitigation
measures to supplement and strengthen the Program EIR measures. Therefore, since the
mitigation measures are incorporated as conditions to the approval of the Project, the
Mitigated Negative Declaration as well as the Program EIR for the 1993 General Plan is
adequate for all approvals relating to the Project.
6. The City Council further finds that no significant new information within the meaning
of the Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5
has been presented to the City which would necessitate recirculation of the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for further public review.
7. On the basis of the whole record before it, there is no substantial evidence that this
project will have a significant effect on the environment, and the Mitigated Negative
Declaration reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Brentwood
takes the following actions:
1. Adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and directs City staff to file a Notice of
Determination with the County Clerk; and
JUS-09-2001 15:42 c;1 I Y Ur bKtN I WUUV 7LJ Jlt7 J 7CJ i
City Council Resolution No.99-253
Page 3
2. Approves General Plan Amendment 99-2 converting 21f acres from Very Low Density
Residential (VL) to Office Business (OB) as shown on Exhibit A attached to this
resolution,and
3. Directs city staff to amend the City's General Plan Land Use Map to reflect the above
change.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Brentwood at its meeting of
December 14, 1999,by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Gomes,McPoland,Petrovich, Mayor Kidd J{
NOES: None I
ABSENT: Councilmember Young
I
r
r i
6;ntin Kidd
Mayor
I
ATTEST:
Karen iaz,CMC
City Clerk
JUL-09-2001 15:42 CITY OF BRF-NI'WUUV
EXMIT A
C:)
c:)
tl
C-.)
S89*21*33*E 1380-50
Lo
C4
:4t U-)
coo w Cl
Lo
cr oCl
to to
cc co 00 Pei
Or Cl
oQ
CM
N8916.4jmW »-50 y
-T]R;l Y
en
P.O.B. t=
:�m C�p
TOTAL AREA = 21.02 AC:t
JUL-09-2001 15:42 CITY OF BRENTWOOD yz�5 b I b Z>4er r.ne�l7
ORDINANCE NO. 627
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD APPROVING
THE REZONE OF 21t ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF LONE TREE
WAY AND O'HARA AVENUE FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TWENTY NINE (PD-29)
TO PLANNED EMPLOYMENT CENTER(PEC).(APN 018-060-006,007,050 & 051)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has requested that the City Council rezone property
located at the northeast corner of Lone Tree Way and O'Hara Avenue as shown on Exhibit A attached to,
and hereby made a part of this ordinance;and
WHEREAS, the applicant has requested the City's review and approval of a tentative
subdivision map on the adjacent properties consisting of 245 single family lots, and 12.2 acres of
neighborhood parks and linear trails; and
WHEREAS, the environmental effects of this proposed action have been addressed in a
Mitigated Negative Declaration, and all potentially adverse impacts have been conditioned to render the
impact to a level of less than significant;and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at its meeting on November 16, 1999, recommended
approval of the requested rezone by passing Resolution 99-47; and
WHEREAS, a legal description of the boundaries of the subject property to be rezoned is
outlined in Exhibit B,which is attached to and made a part of this ordinance; and
WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing was advertised for this rezoning in the Contra Costa
Times on December 3, 1999, and mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of
the site as required by City Ordinance and Government Code Sec.65090; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a public hearing on the proposed rezoning on December 14,
1999, for the purpose of reviewing the application, considering the Planning Commission's action, and
considering all comments made by the public with respect to this proposed zone change;and
WHEREAS, after the close of the public hearing, the City Council considered all public
comments received both before and during the public hearing, the presentation by City staff, the staff
report, which includes an analysis of the consistency of the proposed project with all other goals and
policies of the City and the General Plan, and all other pertinent goals, policies, regulations and
documents regarding the proposed zone change; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brentwood hereby makes the following supporting
findings for this application as required by Section 17.870.008 of the City Zoning Ordinance:
1. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the City's previously expressed intent to stimulate
job generating uses within the City.
2. The proposed rezoning is consistent with the proposed General Plan land use amendment of
the subject property.
3. The proposed rezoning is consistent and compatible with other goals, policies and
implementation programs .set forth in the General Plan which are intended to create a
balance between jobs and housing units approaching 1 to 1 within the City.
JUL-09-2001 15:42 CITY OF bKEN1WUUU DQU( r.U(/Iv
Ordinance No.627
Page 2 of 3
4. That the development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant, will
not be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City and is
consistent with the general intent and spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and with the City's
General Plan, including all relevant elements thereof, particularly in light of the City
Council's concurrent adoption of Resolution 99-253 for GPA 99-2.
5. The effect of this ordinance on the housing needs of the region surrounding Brentwood has
been considered by the City Council, which has balanced those needs against the public .
service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental resources (Government
Code 65863.6).
6. The City Council has reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project
and orders the filing of the Notice of Determination with the Contra Costa Clerk.
7. Pursuant to Section 15168(c) and 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City Council finds
that the Project is within the scope of the development levels evaluated in the Program EIR
prepared for the 1993 City of Brentwood General Plan. The Initial Study has further
evaluated potential project specific impacts to the environment. Based upon this evidence
and the Mitigated Negative Declaration,this City Council finds that the Project will not have
any significant environmental impacts that were not studied in the Program EIR. The
Mitigated Negative Declaration applies all applicable mitigation measures specified in the
Program EIR to the Project and imposes additional mitigation measures to supplement and
strengthen the Program EIR measures. Therefore, since the mitigation measures are
incorporated as conditions to the approval of the Project, the Mitigated Negative Declaration
as well as the Program EIR for the 1993 General Plan is adequate for all approvals relating
to the Project.
S. The City Council further finds that no significant new information within the meaning of the
Public Resources Code Section 21092.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5 has been
presented to the City which would necessitate recirculation of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration for further public review.
9. On the basis of the whole record before it, there is no substantial evidence that this project
will have a significant effect on the environment, and the Mitigated Negative declaration
reflects the City Council's independent judgment and analysis.
NOW,TBEREFORE,the City Council of the City of Brentwood does hereby ordain as
follows:
Section 1. Approves the rezoning of 21t acres (RZ 994) from Planned Development
Twenty Nine (PD-29) to Planned Employment Center (PEC) as reflected on attached Exhibits A and B,
and directs City staff to make the necessary change on the official zoning map of the City of Brentwood.
Section 2.
A. This Ordinance shall be published in accordance with applicable law, by one or more of
the following methods:
1. Posting the entire Ordinance in at least three (3) public places in the City of
Brentwood,within fifteen(15)days after its passage and adoption; or
JUL-dy-d�bbl 15;46 (,1 I Y Ur t$KtN 1 WUUD J1b Z>40( r.UU/ly
Ordinance No.627
Page 3 of 3
2. Publishing the entire Ordinance at least once in the Ledger-Dispatch, a newspaper of
general circulation published in the County of Contra Costa and circulated in the City
of Brentwood,within fifteen(15)days after its passage and adoption; or
3. Publishing a summary of the Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney in the Ledger-
Dispatch and posting a certified copy of the entire Ordinance in the Office of the City
Clerk at least five (5) days prior to passage and adoption, along with the names of
those City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance.
B. This Ordinance shall go into effect thirty (30) days after the date of its passage and
adoption.
Section 3. In accordance with Government Code Section 65863.5, upon the effective date of
this Ordinance,a copy shall be delivered to the County Assessor.
THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced with first reading waived at a regular meeting of the
Brentwood City Council on the 14th day of December 1999,by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Gomes,McPoland,Petrovich,Mayor Kidd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Young
and adopted with second reading waived at a regular meeting of the Brentwood City Council on the 28th
day of December 1999, by the following vote:
AYES: Councihimiber .Ganes, McPoland, Petrovich, Yomg, Mayor Kidd-
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN None - t
mtin L. Kidd
Mayor
ATTEST:
lz
wren iaz,CMC
City Clerk
JVD-09-2001 15:43 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 5407 P.09i19
ED=IT A
0
O
II
N •
w
J '
Q
U
(J7
S89'21'33'E 1380.50'
W
—� r rn
;,�j 0
N
— r p Lit O O F O c0
•� = I Fr- O �W OI , W O
(D O
V �I N
-C), co co co z co z °r' °'
E5 o C S
N N00'38' ' v'
N89'164.cw 1254
358.32 I 91644'W 1040.91'
0 TR 1N Y
a
TOTAL AREA = 21 .02 ACf
JlJL-09-2001 15:43 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 5407 P. 10i19
EXWMI,T B :.`LI.10lin J• A777 .
TT JOB NO. : 788-00
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
P.B.C. RESERVE FOR PD-29
BRENTWOOD, CALIFORNIA
REAL PROPERTY, SITUATE IN THE INCORPORATED TERRITORY OF THE CITY OF
BRENTWOOD, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS:
BEING A PORTION OF LOTS 4 THROUGH 8, AS SAID LOTS 4 THROUGH 6 ARE SHOWN
AND SO DESIGNATED ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED MAP OF JOE PREWETTS,
ELLENDALE SUBDIVISION" , RECORDED MARCH 5, 1912, IN BOOK 6 OF MAPS, AT
PAGE 141, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY,
MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWESTERN CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND
GRANTED TO NORMAN BRADSHAW AND GLORIA BRADSHAW BY DEED RECORDED DECEMBER
3, 1996, IN SERIES NO. 96-224831 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN SAID OFFICE OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY;
THENCE, FROM SAID POINT OF BEGINNING, ALONG THE WESTERN LINE OF SAID
PARCEL OF LAND (96-224831) , NORTH 02°17'43" EAST (THE BEARING OF SAID
WESTERN LINE BEING TAKEN AS NORTH 02017'43" EAST FOR THE PURPOSE OF
MAKING THIS DESCRIPTION) 648 .76 FEET TO THE NORTHWESTERN CORNER OF SAI.D
PARCEL Of LAND (96-224831) ;
THENCE, FROM SAID NORTHWESTERN CORNER, ALONG THE NORTHERN LINE OF SAID
PARCEL OF LAND, SOUTH 89°21'3r EAST 1,380.50 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERN
CORNER OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO CATERINA NICOLETTI BY
DEED RECORDED JUNE 12, 1997, IN SERIES NO. 97-0101423 OF OFFICIAL
RECORDS, IN SAID OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY;
THENCE, FROM SAID NORTHEASTERN CORNER, ALONG THE EASTERN LINE OF SAID
PARCEL OF LAND (97-0101423) , SOUTH 00038'27" WEST 662 .95 FEET TO A POINT
ON THE NORTHERN LINE OF LONE TREE WAY;
THENCE, ALONG SAID NORTHERN LINE, THE FOLLOWING THREE (3) COURSES:
3) NORTH 89016'14" WEST 1, 040.91 FEET,
3) NORTH 00038'27" EAST 12 .50 FEET, AND
3) NORTH 89°16' 44" WEST 358 .32 FEET TO SAID POINT OF BEGINNING.
CONTAINING 21.02 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS,
END OF DESCRIPTION
�q�4oa��-oo�.aoc
JUL-09-2001 15:43 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 5407 P. 11/19
ORDINANCE NO.628
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRENTWOOD AMENDING
CHAPTER 17.479 OF THE BRENTWOOD MUNICIPAL CODE (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE
29) BY ADDING DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR SUBAREA `A' OF ZONING DISTRICT PD=
29, ENCOMPASSING 86 ACRES AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF O'EARA AVENUE AND
NEROLY AVENUE (APN 018-030-002,003 & 004 AND 018-060-016 & 037)
WBFMAS, the owner of said property proposes to construct 245 homes within a conditionally
approved subdivision (Tentative Tract.Map No. 8226); and
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing, considered
public comment, and passed Resolution No. 99-47 on November 16, 1999 which recommended an amendment
to Planned Development Zone 29 (PD-29) to add specific development standards for Subarea 'A' of Zoning
District PD-29; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for this project in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)and reflect the City's independent judgment
and analysis;
WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration is publicly available for review during City business
hours within the Community Development Department and is considered as a part of this review and approval
process; and
WHEREAS, the Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies potentially significant environmental
effects associated with development of the proposed project which can be feasibly mitigated or avoided and
these project measures are included in the project conditions of approval and will reduce the impacts identified
to a less than significant level; and
WHEREAS, a Notice of Public Hearing was legally advertised in the Contra Costa Times orf
December 3, 1999, and mailed to all property owners of record within 300 feet of the subject property
according to City policies and Government Code Section 65091; and
WHEREAS, the boundaries of the subject property for which the development standards apply is
shown in Exhibit"A"attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Brentwood hereby finds, as follows, that the proposed
amendment will: '
• Establish clear development standards for the uses permitted under the General Plan, Zoning
Ordinance,and conditionally approved Tentative Tract Map No. 8226.
• Provide standards resulting in development that is consistent and compatible with surrounding
uses.
• Provide for adequate public uses and private open space.
• Generate a level of traffic that can be accommodated by the public circulation system, existing;
or planned.
JUL-09-2001 15:44 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 540'r N.1211y
Ordinance No. 628
Page 2 of 3
• Serve the housing needs of the City and the region and will not create a detrimental imbalance
between the public service needs of its residents and available fiscal and environmental
resources (Government Code Section 65863.6).
• That the plan for the proposed development presents a unified and organized arrangement of
buildings and service facilities which are appropriate in relation to adjacent or nearby
properties and that adequate landscaping and/or screening is included if necessary to insure
compatibility.
• That the development of the subject property, in the manner proposed by the applicant,will not
be detrimental to the public welfare, will be in the best interests of the City and will be in
keeping with the general intent and spirit of the Zoning Ordinance and with the City's
Community Development Plan, including all relevant Elements thereof, and with any
applicable Specific Plan adopted by the City.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of the City of Brentwood does hereby ordain as
follows:
Section 1. The development standards set forth for the subject 150 acres reflected as Subarea A, B & C as
shown in Exhibit "A" are hereby added to Chapter 17.479 of the Municipal Code as shown in Exhibit "B"
attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance.
Section 2. Section 17.479.001 through 17.479.006 are hereby added for the purpose of regulating certain real
property and establishing development standards for Subarea A of PD-29.
Section 3. The Mitigated Negative Declaration is hereby certified and staff is hereby directed to file a Notice
of Determination with the County Clerk upon adoption of this ordinance in accordance with Section 15075(d)
of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Section 4.
A. This Ordinance shall be published in accordance with applicable law, by one or more of the following
methods:
L Posting the entire Ordinance in at least three (3)public places in the City of Brentwood, within fifteen
(15) days after its passage and adoption; or
2. Publishing the entire Ordinance at least once in the Antioch Daily Ledger, a newspaper of general
circulation published in the County of Contra Costa and circulated in the City of Brentwood, within
fifteen(15) days after its passage and adoption; or
3. Publishing in the Antioch Daily Ledger a summary of the Ordinance prepared by the City Attorney and
posting a certified copy of the Ordinance in the Office of the City Clerk at least five (5) days prior to
passage and adoption, along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the
Ordinance.
B. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty(30)days after the date of its passage and adoption.
Section 5. 1n accordance with Government Code Section 65863.5, upon the effective date of this Ordinance, a
copy shall be delivered to the County Assessor.
�uu-ey-�ee1 15;44 CITY ur bKtNiwuuli 925 516 5407 P.13i19
Ordinance No. 628
Page 3 of 3
THE FOREGOING ORDINANCE was introduced with the first reading waived at a regular meeting
of the Brentwood City Council on the 14th day of December 1999, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers Gomes,McPoland, Petrovich,Mayor Kidd
NOES: None
ABSENT: Councilmember Young
ABSTAIN: None
and adopted with second reading waived at a regular meeting of the Brentwood City Council on the 28th day of
December 1999,by the following vote:
AYES: Cotm hwnbers Genes, McPoland, Petrovich, Young, Mayor Kidd
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
mtin Kidd
Mayor
ATTEST:
L ,
Karen biaz, CMC .
City Clerk
•
a�
J - -
AA
V •
• Am
At
MEN
MEN
aimTr.tt'•. ':��.
a�\� �a_i...j. ..r_...wC.'.a�..Y�r11•.:7e'L-l•�Ld'1�4 a� {�y 1
�, ',• :,-�i:%��•. ^: r' :Jr :yP.t._`.==J '�• sir:
Sim
all
�,� '•�' •rj as ,.r...%
JUL-09-2001 15:45 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 5407 P.15/19
E' I' R
ED 29
BRENTWOOD, CALIFORNIA
LAND USE SUMMARY
Existing Proposed PEC
am Owner APN Acreage Units Units Reserve
JOAREA A
Subdivision 8226
Condon 018-030-M2 44.0±
Cunha 018-030-003 22.4±
Cunha 018-060.037 .11.5 ±
Cunha 018430-004 5.9t
Cunha 018-060-016 0.17±
O'Hara RM 0.99:t
Anderson Lan6 RNV 11
Subarea A Subtotal $6.1 ± 0 246 0
UHAREA R
Valle 018-030-013 1.13 ± 2 2 0
O'Brien 018-030.012 1.3± 1 3 0
Kindt 018-060429 2.6± 1 5 0
Kutch 0184ZO-047 0.82± 1 2 0
Martinez 0184e0412 0.31 ± 1 1 0
Passey 018-060-048 0.75± 1 2 0
Peters 018-060-010 1.3± 1 3 0
G2udinier 018-060-030 1.9;t 1 3 0
Rica 018-460-031 2.2± 1 3 0
Turner 018-060-018 2.5± 1 5 0
Wondolowski 018-060417 0.5± 1 1 0
Wcndolcwski 01&-060-019 0.5 + 1 1 0
Davies 018-060-045 1.01 1 2 0
JUL-09-2001 15:45 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 540.7 r. lbily
Existing Proposed P E C
Item Owner APN Acreage Units Unita Reserve
14.) Navarro 018-060-046 2.0-+ 1 4 0
15.) Briones 018-060-043 5,43± 1 10 0
16.) Mens 018-060-042 5.0± 1 9 0
17.) Dennenburg 018-050-041 5.1 ± 1 9 0
18.) McGoveran 018-060-004 1.0± 1 1 0
19.) Brister 018-060-035 0.71 ± 1 1 0
20.) Hurtado 018-060-034 0.87± 1 2 0
21.) Harris 018-060-039 1.0± 1 1 0
22.) Carson 018460-038 1.9± 1 2 0
23.) Fugi 018-060-040 5.3 ± 1 12 0
Flood Control R/W 1.64± 0 0 0
O'Hara RNV 0,99± 0 0 0
Lone Tree RNV 1.27± 0 0 0
Anderson Lane RNV 0.55± 0 0 0
Subarea B Subtotal 49.57± 24 84 Q
S TSAR A C
1.) Martins 018-030-008 4.2± 1 5 0
Z) Reed 018-030-010 1.26± 1 2 0
3.) Duarte 018-030-011 1.28± 1 2 0
4.) Garrido 018-030-006 0.73± 1 2 0
5.) Orman 018-030-007 0.68± 1 2 0
Anderson Lane RW 1.1 ± 0 0 0
O
Subarea C Subtotal 9.3± 6 !J
JWL-09-2001 15:45 CITY OF BRENTWOOD 925 516 5407 P. 17i19
E)=IT B
CHAPTER 17.479
PD—29 (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT 29)ZONE
O'HARA/ANDERSON PROPERTIES
17.479.001 AUTHORITY,PURPOSE AND INTENT
17.479.002 PERMITTED USES
17.479.003 CONDITIONALLY PERMITTED USES
17.479.004 REGULATIONS FOR SUBAREA A
17.479.005 REGULATIONS FOR SUBAREA B
17.479.006 REGULATIONS FOR SUBAREA C
17.479.001 AUTHORITY,PURPOSE AND INITNT:
The authority, purpose and intent for the adoption of the PD-29 (Planned Development 29) zone
are as follows:
A. Authority: PD-29 zone is adopted pursuant to the authority set forth in Chapter 17.450, Planned
Development Zones,General Regulations of the Brentwood Municipal Code.
B. Purpose: The purpose of the PD-29 zone is to permit and regulate the orderly development of
single family detached homes,Planned Employment Center(PEC), and public uses in accordance
with the goals of the City of Brentwood's Planned Development regulations. PD-29 is being
divided into three(3) subareas. Specific uses and development standards are being proposed for
only one of the subareas at this time. Specific uses and detailed development standards for the
remaining subareas will be proposed at a later date when these areas are ready for development
and/or redevelopment.
17.479.002 PERMITTED USES FOR SUBAREA A:
Permitted uses in the PD-29 zone are those permitted under R-I (Single Family Residential)zone,
Section 17.130.002 of the Zoning Ordinance.
17.479.003 CONDMONALLY PERMMED USES FOR SUBAREA A:
Conditionally permitted uses are those uses identified in Section 17.130.003 of the Zoning
Ordinance,which are subject to the granting of a Conditional Use Permit by the City.
17.479.004 REGULATIONS FOR SUBAREA A:
The following regulations shall apply to Subarea A:
A. Minimum Lot Area: 7,000 square feet.
B. Average Lot Area: 9,000 square feet.
JUL-09-2001 15:45 CITY OF B%N►wuull y�� �1b 54er r.le�ly
C. Minimum Lot Width: Seventy(70)feet.
1. The lot width for lots on cul-de-sacs,curvilinear streets, etc.shall be a minimum of forty
(40)feet at the front property line.
D. Minimum Lot Depth: One-hundred(100) feet.
E. Minimum Front Yard: Twenty(20)feet to the garage; except twelve (12)feet to the garage for a
swing driveway. Fifteen (15) feet to any living space_ Twelve (12)feet for porches.
F. Minimum Lot Frontage: One-half(1/2) the required lot width.
G. Minimum Side Yard: Minimum five(5)feet; sum of both sides, fifteen (15)feet. Corner lots
shall maintain a minimum side yard on the street of ten (10) feet. Driveways and/or flatwork shall
be allowed within the setback area.
H. Minimum Rear Yard: Twenty(20) feet.
I. Maximum Lot Coverage: 40%
J. Maximum Building Height: No main building shall exceed the height of two stories and thirty(30)
feet.
K. Detached Garages and Out Buildings: Will have a minimum setback of five (5) feet from all
property lines.
L. Design and Site Development Review shall be required for all housing units pursuant to Sections
17.100.003 and 17.100.004.H.
M. Off-street parking shall be provided pursuant to Chapter 17.620 and Sections 17.100.004.H.
N. The parking and storage of boats,trailers and similar vehicles and equipment shall be subject to the
provisions of Section 17.620.0016.
O. Accessory buildings and structures shall be permitted pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 17.660.
P. Architectural features may project into any required yard pursuant to the provisions of Chapter
17.660.
Q. The development of this zoning district shall be substantially in accordance with the Development
Plan. Variations in the Development Plan including street and lot pattern may be approved through
the subdivision map process.
R. Maximum number of dwelling units shall be 245.
S_ A minimum of 50%of the homes abutting O'Hara Avenue shall be.single story.
T. Side Loading Garage: Ten(10)percent of the lots shall have side-loading garages.
U. Corner Lots: Fifty(50)percent of corner lots shall have single story units.
V. A minimum of twenty-five(25)percent of the lots shall have single story units.
W. . The City's decorative street light standard shall be utilized throughout the subdivision.
JU L-U'v-eUUI l::>.4b LIIY Ur t1KLN I WUUL 925 516 5407 P. 19/19
17.479.003 REGULATIONS FOR SUBAREA B:
The following regulations shall apply to Subarea B:
A. Development standards shall be adopted at a later date, but prior to development or redevelopment
of the properties.
B. Maximum number of dwelling units shall be 84.
17.479.006 REGULATIONS FOR SUBAREA C:
The following regulations shall apply to Subarea C:
A. Development standards shall be adopted at a later date, but prior to development or redevelopment
of the properties.
B. Maximum number of dwelling units shall be 13.
. ( 1
TOTAL P. 19