Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 07182006 - D.3 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS �.f - ''' Contra FROM: DENNIS M. BARRY, AICP Costa COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR ��`!�' :--�' County DATE: June 27, 2006 SUBJECT: Hearing on the County Planning Commission Recommendation on a Proposed Planned Unit District Rezoning and Preliminary and Final Development Plan Approval for a residential project ("Weatherly Place") at #4776 Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez/Pacheco area, County File #RZ05-3154 & #DP05-3002 (David O. Isakson - Applicant) (William Kelleher -Owner) (SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT 11) SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION I. RECOMMENDATIONS A. After accepting any public testimony, close the hearing. B. Pursuant to the recommendations of the County Planning Commission: 1.) FIND the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program prepared for this project to be adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and adopt the same. 2.) APPROVE the rezoning of a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple Family Residential District (M- 12) to Planned Unit District (P-1), with a variance to the minimum area requirement (5 acres minimum required). /� CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITT E APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE (S): ACTION OF BOARD ON APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED 9ptR VrOF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND UNANIMOUS(ABSENT/ CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND AYES: NOES: ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF ABSENT: ABSTAIN: SUPERVISORS ON TH ATE SHOWN Contact: Rose Marie Pietras(925)335-1216 ATTESTED JOHN CU CLERK OF THE BOARD OF Orig:Community Development Department SUPERV S AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR cc: David O. Isakson (Applicant) William Kelleher (Owner) Public Works Dept., Eng.Services Div. BY PUTY GIS RZ053154 C/ June 27, 2006 Board of Supervisors Isakson/Kelleher Residential Project File#RZ053154 &#DP05-3002 Page 2 3.) APPROVE the proposed Preliminary and Final Development Plan for eight (8) residential lots with conditions as recommended by the County Planning Commission. 4.) ADOPT the findings contained in the County Planning Commission Resolution No. 18- 2006 as the basis for the Board's action. C. INTRODUCE Ordinance No. 2006-25 giving effect to the aforesaid rezoning; waive reading and adopt same. D. DIRECT the Community Development Department to post the Notice of Determination with the County Clerk. 11. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant is responsible for the cost of processing the rezoning request. III. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The applicant is requesting the rezoning of a one-acre parcel located at 4776 Pacheco Boulevard in the Pacheco area from Multiple Family Residential (M-12) to Planned Unit District (P-1), and approval of Preliminary and Final Development Plans to allow a single family residential development consisting of eight (8) lots. The property is located on the southwestern side of Pacheco Boulevard, approximately 3500 feet north of Highway 4 and 1000 feet south of the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks, within the unincorporated Martinez area. The property has a conventional wood-frame house along the top of the slope at the southwestern end of the property. Below the existing house are some narrow terraces with fruit trees. The proposed project is surrounded by suburban portions of the City of Martinez, and unincorporated Contra Costa County. To the north of the property is an approved (but not yet built) 20-lot subdivision of single family homes; across Pacheco Boulevard to the east, land uses include a church and small areas of open space abutting the 1-680 highway that appear to be relatively undeveloped; to the south is Sunrise Business Park within the City of Martinez; and to the west are three single family homes. The project is proposing eight single family residences ranging in size from 1787 to 1871 square feet; and lots averaging 4,475 square feet in size and 46.4 feet in width. The project includes two different design themes, each with four elevation options, for a total of eight different design combinations. The houses would be two stories (maximum height of 35 feet), have four bedrooms and a two car garage. The General Plan designates the site Multiple Family Residential— Low Density (7.3— 11.9 units per net acre). While the General Plan designates the site Multiple Family Residential, the General Plan also provides that detached single family residential design (as is proposed with this project) is consistent with a Multiple Family Residential designation. The unit count of the project is consistent with the General Plan density range for this site. The residential design is compatible with existing single family residential units to the west of the project, and the approved, but not yet built, single family residential design for the 20-unit project to the north of this site. June 27, 2006 Board of Supervisors Isakson/Kelleher Residential Project File#RZ053154 &#DP05-3002 Page 3 City of Martinez Comments The City of Martinez abuts the south side of the project, and the property lies within the sphere of influence of the City of Martinez. In a letter dated February 7, 2005, the City asked for several considerations in the review of this project. Those considerations are summarized below together with the staff response. • That landscaping should be maintained by an entity other than a public agency. Response - There will be no common areas for this project. All open areas lie on private lots which shall be maintained by individual homeowners. • We recommend that a sound wall be installed on the eastern side of Lot 8 to buffer the new subdivision from traffic noise from Pacheco Boulevard. Response — Condition #27 provides for a seven foot noise barrier wall along side and rear yards of the two lots closest to Pacheco Boulevard. • The City recommends that the Pacheco Boulevard improvements be coordinated to match the improvements along Pacheco Boulevard. Response — The Public Works Department has indicated that Conditions #47 through #51 provide for the necessary improvements including appropriate coordination with existing improvements along Pacheco Boulevard. Review by County Planning Commission On March 28, 2006, the County Planning Commission heard the applicant's request for a rezoning from the Multiple Family Residential District (M-12) to a Planned Unit District (P-1); a preliminary and final development plan to establish an eight residential unit project. No one testified in opposition to the project at the Planning Commission hearing. After evaluating the proposal and the evidence submitted, the Commission unanimously voted (as a consent item) to recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed rezoning and preliminary and final development plan. The Commission also approved the major subdivision application contingent on the Board's approval of its recommended rezoning action. Staff believes the project has merit, because it is creating a little neighborhood by transforming underutilized property into 8 single family homes. This project will help facilitate the County's housing goals. Therefore, staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors approve the proposed rezoning and development plans. IV. CONSEQUENCE OF INACTION OR DENIAL OF PROPOSAL BY THE BOARD. In the event that the Board denies the request, the property's Multiple Family Residential (M-12) zoning would remain. The County Planning Commission approved the vesting tentative map for eight lots contingent upon the Board's approval of the rezoning. If the site is not rezoned, the subdivision will be null and void. G:\current planning\curr plan\board\board orders\rz053154-b.bo RMP\RD RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. 18-2006 RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, INCORPORATING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE REQUESTED CHANGE IN ZONING BY DAVID O. ISAKSON (APPLICANT), WILLIAM KELLEHER (OWNER) (RZ053154') IN THE ORDINANCE CODE SECTION PERTAINING TO THE PRECISE ZONING FOR THE PACHECO AREA OF SAID COUNTY; A PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (File #DP05-3002) FOR A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT; AND A SUBDIVISION APPLICATION (Subdivision 8944). WHEREAS, a request by David O. Isakson (Applicant), William Kelleher (Owner) to rezone 1.10 acres from Multiple Family Residential (M-12) to Planned Unit District (P- 1); Preliminary and Final Development Plan approval, and approval of an eight-lot subdivision., for which applications were received by the Community Development Department on January 14, 2005; and WHEREAS, for purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and the State and County CEQA Guidelines, a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for review and comments on December 15, 2005. Staff discovered that the noisemitigations were inadvertently not included and therefore a. revised Mitigated Negative Declaration was circulated for review and comments on February 8, 2006. WHEREAS, after notice having been lawfully given, a public hearing was scheduled before the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, March 28, 2006 where all persons interested therein might appear and be heard; and WHEREAS, on Tuesday, March 28, 2006, the County Planning Commission having fully reviewed, considered and evaluated all the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the County Planning Commission: 1. FINDS that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program are adequate for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and adopts same; 2. APPROVES the 8-lot subdivision contingent upon the Board of Supervisors rezoning of the property from Multiple Family Residential (M-12) District to the Planned Unit District (P-1). 3. RECOMMENDS to the Board of Supervisors the APPROVAL of the rezoning of the site from the Multiple Family Residential (M-12) District to the Planned Unit 2 District (P-1), and the Preliminary and Final Development Plan subject to conditions; BE :[T FURTHER RESOLVED that the reasons for this recommendation are as follows: A. Rezoning Findings: 1. Required Finding: The change proposed will substantially comply with the General Plan. Project Finding: The project site is currently zoned Multiple Family Residential (M-12), and designated Multiple - Family Residential — Low Density (ML; 7.3 — 11.9 units per net acre) land use district in the General Plan. While the General Plan designates the site Multiple Family Residential, the General Plan also provides that the prohibitions on detached structures found within the residential plan categories can be modified if found to be appropriate, to comply with the General Plan intent, and to respond to site environmental factors through the Planned Unit District process. The General Plan also provides that the Planned Unit District ordinance is intended to provide flexibility of site design, building massing, setbacks, height, etc. P-1 projects may be approved in any of the land use categories provided that the overall density of the project is within the range specified in that category. (ref.pg. 3-15 of the General Plan) In this instance, the nearby residential uses that exist or have received County entitlements, consist of detached single. family residences. Therefore, this style of housing is deemed more appropriate for this site than would be conventional attached residential designs. Moreover, the proposed density of the project (8 units on 1.1 net acres, or 7.3 units per net acre) is consistent with the ML density range. It should be noted that the County has allowed for detached single family residential designs under the P-1 zoning district on other properties within the immediate vicinity. In view of these considerations, the proposed rezoning to P-1, Planned Unit District for the purpose of developing eight single-family homes is substantially consistent with the General Plan. 2. Required Finding: The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible within the district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts. Project Finding: The County Code specifically lists residential uses as being appropriate for P-1 districts and states that P-1 districts are 3 compatible with the ML land use designation. The subject property lies in the vicinity of the Pacheco Boulevard— unincorporated Pacheco area of the County. The majority of the properties along this vicinity of Pacheco Boulevard are urbanized with transitioning into single family residential. 3. Required Finding: Community need has been demonstrated for the use proposed, but this does not require demonstration of future financial success. Project Finding: The County demonstrates a need for housing opportunities of all types. The rezoning of this property to P-1 will allow the higher density consistent with the ML designation while providing a highly desirable and aesthetically pleasing product. B. Findings to Establish a Planned Unit(P-1)District Adoption of P-1 Zoning and Approval of a Preliminary or Final Development Plan. 1. Required Finding: The applicant intends to start construction within two and one-half years from the effective date of the zoning change and plan approval. Project Finding: The applicant has expressed a desire to begin construction after required permits and approvals have been obtained. 2. Required Finding: The proposed planned unit development is consistent with the County General Plan. Project Finding: The General Plan designation for the project site is Multiple Family Residential—Low. The Final Development Plan describes a development of eight single-family units that meets the General Plan density requirements. 3. Required Finding: In the case of residential development, it will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community. Project Finding: The Pacheco area of the County is characterized as an urbanized area that is transitioning into higher density single family residential development. The proposed development.will allow homes of architectural quality and will be in harmony with the design of surrounding developments being built in the area. 4 The desirability of the project lies in its aesthetic quality and its lot configuration. The project provides for a density level consistent with the General Plan that will result in single-family residential designs that are compatible with nearby existing and approved residential development. The single-family residences provide for adequate on-site guest parking and private yard areas. The addition of the landscaping plan will increase the visual and aesthetic character of the project. C. Findings for Granting a Variance to Allow Use of P-1 District on Less than 5-Acres for a Residential Project 1. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and the respective land use district in which the subject property is located. Prosect Finding: Allowing the applicant to rezone a parcel less than 5-acres to P-1 will not constitute a grant of special privilege. Numerous other properties in the vicinity and within the County have been rezoned to P-1 without containing 5 acres or more. 1. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property because of its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the identical land use district. Prosect Finding: Allowing the 1.1-acre parcel to be zoned P-1 will facilitate the establishment of a comprehensive plan for the 8-unit development. The density of the property as identified in the General Plan allows for the establishment of 8 residential units. 3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall substantially meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district in which the subject property is located. Prosect Finding: The variance is to allow the 1.1-acre parcel to be rezoned to the P-1 zoning district. The intent and purpose of the proposed P-1 is to provide for a well designed, 8-unit residential project. D. Growth Management Element Performance Standards Findings 1. Traffic: The project will generate less than 100-peak hour trips and does not trigger a Measure C traffic study. 5 2. Water: The property is in the County Costa Water District; the project is proposing to obtain its water supply from the District. This approval requires the applicant to provide a "will-serve" letter to the County prior to filing the Final Map. The applicant shall bear all expenses associated with constructing a water system capable of meeting the fire flow and water demand and water quality requirements of the water district and of the fire district. 3. Sanitary Sewer: The site lies within the Mountain View Sanitary District. The District has verified it is able to serve the project subject to this project's compliance with their standard fees, specifications and conditions. 4. Fire Protection: Prior to the approval of a final map, the applicant is required to demonstrate that all of the proposed development is located within one and one-half miles of the fire station, or that the development within the project that is more than one and one-half miles from the fire station shall.be required to provide automatic fire sprinkler systems. The nearest station is Station 9 located at 209 Center Avenue in Pacheco. 5. Public Protection: The Growth Management Element standard is 155 square feet of Sheriff facility station area per 1,000 population. Therefore, there is no policy requirement to contribute to Sheriff facility improvements. 6. Parks & Recreation: At the time of issuance of residential building permits, the applicant will be required to contribute a park dedication fee in accordance with ordinance requirements. Currently, the park dedication fee is $2,000.00 per new residence. 7. Flood Control & Drainage: The project will be required to meet all collect and convey requirements. The site is not subject to flood hazard conditions, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency has not designated this site within a special flood hazard zone. E. Findings for Granting_Approval of a Tentative Map ReAuired Finding — No local agency shall approve a tentative map unless the legislative body finds that the proposed subdivision together with the provisions for its design and improvement is consistent with the general plan. Project Finding — The density of the eight-unit project on this 1.1 acre site is consistent with the General Plan Multiple Family Residential — Low (7.3 — 11.9 units per net acre) designation. The project is required to comply with the collect and' convey drainage requirements of the subdivision ordinance. The project is also required to install frontage improvements (sidewalk, curb and gutter) along Pacheco Boulevard, and to upgrade the existing private access road that serves 6 this site and other nearby properties. Based on these considerations, the project is consistent with the General Plan including its design and improvement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairperson and Secretary of this Planning Commission will sign and attest the certified copy of this resolution and deliver the same to the Board of Supervisors, all in accordance with the Government Code of the State of California. The instructions by the County Planning Commission to prepare this resolution were given by motion of the County Planning Commission on Tuesday, March 28, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: Clark,Battaglia, Murray, Terrell, Wong, and Snyder NOES: None ABSENT: Gaddis ABSTAIN: None DON SNYDER Chair of the County Planning Commission County of Contra Costa, State of California ATTEST: DENNIS M.BARRY, Secretar County of Contra Costa State of California GAcurrent planning\curr-plan\board\resolution\RZ053154-b.res RMP\RD FINDINGS MAP FindingsNbp �"'� •re'ii:ii � Martinez *�,•� •,�••'� � � artinez �P\ 4 Rezone From M12 To P-1 Martinez Area I, Don Snyder Chair of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission,State of California,do hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of_bdaP_ r-13 of theCounty fi 2005 zonfna map indicating thereon the decision of the Contra Costa County Planning Commission in the matter of_ Tfiokfion & ASfioC.1lt TYIf' -R�50�154 ATTEST Secretaryof the Contra Costa County Planning Commission,StateofCalif. ORDINANCE No. 2006-25 (Re-Zoning Land in the Martinez Area) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: SECTION 1: Page G-13 of the County's 2005 Zoning Map (Ord. No. 2005-03) is amended by re-zoning the land in the above area shown shaded on the map(s) attached hereto and incorporated herein.(see also Community Development Department File No. .RZ053154 FROM: Land Use District M-1-2- Multiple Family Residential TO: Land Use District P-1 Planned Unit and the Community Development Director shall change the Zoning Map accordingly, pursuant to Ordinance Code Sec. 84.2.002. Ne 41�1' 0 6 Martinez rtinez SECTION 11. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days of passage shall be p ublished once with the names of supervisors voting for and against it in the zldzf2 aw2 a newspaper published in this County. PASSED on u,,-7 e by the following vote: SUPERVISOR AYE NO ABSENT ABSTAIN 1. J. Gioia PO ( ) ( ) 2. G. B. Uilkema 3, M. N. Piepho 4. M. DeSaulnier 5. F. D. Glover ATTEST: John Cullen, County Administrator and C(erk of the Board of Supervisors 4Chairman of the Board B Dep. (SEAL) ORDINANCE NO. 2096-25 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 28, 2006 FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR COUNTY FILE #DP053002, SD058944• AND RZ053154: DAVID O. ISAKSON (APPLICANT) — WILLIAM KELLEHER (OWNER) AS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION ON MARCH 28, 2006 FINDINGS A. Planned Unit(P-1)District Project Findings 1. Required Finding: The applicant intends to start construction within two and one half years of the effective date of the zoning change and plan approval. Prosect Finding: The applicant intends to start the project within two and one half years of the effective date. 2. Required Finding: The proposed planned unit development is consistent with the County General Plan. Protect Finding: The proposed planned unit development is consistent with the Multiple Family Low General Plan Designation. The number of units proposed and the type of development are uses that are compatible with the multiple family (low) land use designations. 3. Required Finding: In the case of residential development, it will constitute a residential environment of sustained desirability and stability, and will be in harmony with the character of the surrounding neighborhood and community. Proiect Finding: The project is located in an area that is a mixture of use in transition. Pacheco Boulevard is becoming predominantly residential. The establishment of 8 single family style residences will fit in well within the neighborhood. The property is surrounded by a church, business park and residential use consisting of single-family residences. The project will fit in well with the surrounding uses and will add to the harmony and character of the neighborhood. 4. Required Finding: The development of a harmonious integrated plan justifies exceptions from the normal application of this code. Protect Finding: The project as conditioned is a harmonious plan that will justify the exceptions from the normal applications. B. Growth Management Findings 1. Traffic: The proposal to establish 8 single family residences on the site does not trigger the Measure C requirements of the County Ordinance. The number of peak trips generated by the project 8 peak hour trips—The impacts that the project will have on the major arterials in the area will be minimal. 2. Water: The County pursuant to its police power and as the proper governmental entity responsible for directly regulating land use density or intensity, property development and the subdivision of property within the unincorporated areas of the County, shall require new development to demonstrate that adequate water quantity and quality can be provided. The property is in the Contra Costa Water District, however no 30 day comments were received verifying that the district can adequately serve the project once the necessary improvements are made. Therefore,the applicant shall provide a will serve letter to the County prior to recording the Final Map. The applicant shall bear all expenses associated with constructing a water system capable of meeting the fire flow and water demand and water quality requirements of the water district and of the fire district. 3. Sanitary Sewer: The County pursuant to its police power and as the proper governmental entity responsible for directly regulating land use density or intensity, property development and the subdivision of property within the unincorporated areas of the County, shall require new development to demonstrate that adequate sanitary sewer quantity and quality can be provided. The Mt. View Sanitary District has responded verifying service to the project subject to their standard fees, specifications, and conditions. 4. Fire Protection: Fire stations shall be located within one and one-half miles of developments in urban, suburban and central business district areas. The subject property is located near Station 9 at 209 Center Avenue. 5. Public Protection: The project will not result in a population increase of 1000 people, therefore there are no special capital improvements contributions required of this project. The project will be required to provide for an assessment district to allow for an assessment district to allow for a supplemental tax on each residential lot for augmented police services. 6. Parks and Recreation: Per the requirements of the County Ordinance, the applicant will be required to pay a per unit park dedication fee of$2,000 per unit. This money is placed in a trust, to be used for the purchase of future park property within the County. 7. Flood Control and Drainage: The property is not located in a flood zone. As part of the application the applicant has submitted a stormwater management plan. The plan identifies the location and type of drainage systems that will be used on the site. 2 C. Rezoning Findings 1. Required Finding: The change proposed will substantially comply with the General Plan. Project Finding: The proposed planned unit development will be in substantial compliance with the General Plan. The density range for this property is 7.3 to 11 .9 units per net acre. The density range for this property is 6.4 to 10.4 units per net acre. 2. Required Finding: The uses authorized or proposed in the land use district are compatible within the district and to uses authorized in adjacent districts. Project Finding: The proposed development plan for this P-1 is compatible within the P-1 district and is compatible with other adjacent districts. The subject property is surrounded by residential uses as well as mixture of other uses. The proposed 8 unit residential development is a single-family residential use and will be compatible with the surrounding uses. Contiguous to the north of this property is a single family residential project presently being developed. 3. Required Finding: Community need has been demonstrated for the use proposed,but this not require demonstration of future financial success. Project Finding: The demand for single-family residences in the Pacheco Road area of Martinez is high. The Pacheco Road area is located in an ideal area within a unique setting. The County's goal is to develop well- designed projects that fit in better with the character of the area. Rezoning the site to Planned Unit Development allows the site to be developed in a manner that better meets the needs and desires of the community. D. Tentative Map Findings 1. Required Finding: The County Planning Commission shall not approve a tentative map unless it shall find that the proposed subdivision, together with the provisions for design and improvement, is consistent with the applicable general and specific plans required by law. When approving the tentative map for a major subdivision, the advisory agency shall make findings as required concerning the fulfillment of construction requirements. Project Finding: The proposal to develop the 1.1-acre site with 8 attached units is consistent with the multiple family (low) land use designation. The General Plan identifies attached units as being compatible with the multiple family (low) land use designation, with a density range of 7.3 to 3 11.9 dwelling units per net acre. Under the current general plan designations the allowed density would range from 6.4 to 10.4 units, the proposed density is for 8 units. The Housing Element of the General Plan also stipulates that, whenever possible, residential zoning districts should be changed to P-1. E. Variance Findings 1. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and the respective land use district in which the subject property is located. Project Finding: Allowing the applicant to rezone a parcel less than 5- acres to P-1 will not constitute a grant of special privilege. Numerous other properties in the vicinity and within the County have been rezoned to P-1 without containing 5 acres or more. 2. Required Finding: That because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property because of its size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of the respective zoning regulations is found to deprive the subject property of rights enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and within the identical land use district. Project Finding: Allowing the 1.1-acre parcel to be zoned P-1 will facilitate the establishment of a comprehensive plan for the 8 unit development. The density of the property as identified in the General Plan allows for the establishment of 8 residential units. Development of the property under separate zoning districts could result in a fragmented development that is not consistent with the goals of the County. 3. Required Finding: That any variance authorized shall substantially meet the intent and purpose of the respective land use district in which the subject property is located. Project,Finding: The variance is to allow the 1.1-acre parcel to be rezoned to the P-1 zoning district. The intent and purposed of the proposed P-1 is to provide for a well designed, consistent, 8 unit residential project. 4 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. This approval is based upon the exhibits received by the Community Development Department listed as follows: a) Vesting Tentative Map dated March 20, 2006 b) Final Development Plan dated March 20, 2006 c) Building Elevations dated January 13, 2005 d) Preliminary Grading Plan dated March 20, 2006 e) Preliminary Geotechnical Report dated January 28, 2005 prepared by Diablo Engineers, Inc. f) Geological Peer Review dated February 11, and October 17, 2005 prepared by Darwin Myers Associates. g) Environmental Noise Assessment dated June 1, 2005 prepared by Illingworth &Rodkin, Inc. 2. A variance is granted to allow a P-1 zoning on a parcel less than 5 acres for a residential use. 3. The approval is for a three (3) year period, which may be extended, consistent with provisions of State Law. An extension request must be submitted prior to expiration of the initial approval and must be accompanied by the appropriate filing fee. An extension request is subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. 4. _ The maximum number of lots approved for this project is 8 lots. The general guide for development will be R-6 residential standards subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. 5. Payment of any Supplemental Application Processing Fees Which are Due - This application is subject to an initial application fee, which was paid with the application submittal,plus time, and material costs if the application review expenses exceed 100% of the initial fee. Any additional fee due must be paid within 60 days of the permit effective date or prior to use of the permit whichever occurs first. The fees include costs through permit issuance plus five working days for file preparation. The applicant may obtain current costs by contacting the project planner. If the applicant owes additional fees, a bill will be sent to the applicant shortly after permit issuance. 6. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66474.9, the applicant (including the subdivider or any agent thereof) shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the Contra Costa County Planning Agency and its agents, officers, and employees from any claim, 5 action, or proceeding against the Agency(the County) or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void, or annul, the Agency's approval concerning this subdivision map application, which action is brought within the time period provid- ed for in Section 66499.37. The County will promptly notify the subdivider of any such claim, action, or proceeding and cooperate fully in the defense. 7. Prior to the issuance of any grading permit or the filing of a final map, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall provide evidence to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator that proper permits or substantial review has been undertaken by the appropriate special districts. 8. At least 30 days prior to issuance of any building permits, an overall plan for lot development shall be submitted for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator showing proposed building setbacks and yard distances. Rezone Required 9. _ This-subdivision shall be approved contingent upon approval of the rezoning request (RZ053154) from M-12 to P-1. If the site is not rezoned this approval shall be null and void. TDM Condition 10. _ At least 30 days prior to filing a Final Map, the applicant shall submit a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) information program in accord with the requirements of Ordinance No. 03-02 (Chapter 82-32) for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Applicant shall also comply with the County Growth Management Program and Bay Area Air Quality Management District regulations regarding transportation. Design Conditions 11. At least 30 days prior to the issuance of the first building or grading permit for residences proposed residential designs shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval. The submittal shall include the site plan, a grading plan, structural elevations, floor plans and a sample palette of the exterior materials. 12. The design shall be similar to the design of the buildings identified in the application submittal package, received by the Community 6 Development Department January 14, 2005. The following design features shall be required for each building, subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. A. Window trim and accents shall be required for all windows. Trim shall be similar to the trim shown in the submitted drawings or improved. B. A combination of shutters and wood window trim shall be used for all windows facing Weatherly Lane. A minimum of 50% of the windows facing Weatherly Lane shall incorporate shutters. C. In order to promote good community design for the area, and encourage variation within the project, the exterior finish of the buildings shall vary. Buildings shall be finished with horizontal wood siding or shingles or stucco or similar finish to be approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to the issuance of any residential building permits. A good mix of exterior finishes shall be incorporated into the project. D. Exterior siding and roof colors and materials shall utilize non-reflective earth tone colors. The residences shall be painted different colors in order to break up the building mass along Weatherly Lane. E. A combination of hip, gable and other roof types shall be used throughout the development. 13. _ Each unit shall have illuminated address numbers that are clearly visible to the street day and night. 14. _ All garages shall be fitted and maintained with automatic garage door openers. CC&R's 15. _ Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted for review with the Final Map, and shall be subject to review and approval by the Zoning Administrator. This document shall provide for establishment, ownership and maintenance of the common open space and parking, fire protection, fencing private streets and drainage maintenance,keeping of pets and establishment of signs and other common structures. 7 The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) developed for this project shall include the following deed restriction: A. Exterior materials and colors shall not vary from the palette approved for the original homes. B. No recreational vehicle, boat, boat trailer or mobile home shall be stored on the site overnight. ' Street Naime 16. At least 30 days prior to filing the Final Map, the proposed street name shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department, Graphics Section (Phone#335-1270). Alternate street names should be submitted. The Final Map cannot be certified by the Community Development Department without the approved street name. Archaeology 17. Should archaeological materials be uncovered during grading, 'trenching or other on-site excavation(s), earthwork within 30 yards of these materials shall be stopped until a professional archaeologist who is certified by the Society of Professional Archaeology(SOPA) has had an opportunity to evaluate the significance of the find and suggest appropriate mitigation(s),if deemed necessary. Child Care Condition 18. The developer shall pay a fee of$400 per lot/unit toward child care facility needs in the area as established by the Board of Supervisors. Police Service Mitigation 19. The owner of the property shall participate in the provision of funding to maintain and augment police services by voting to approve a special tax for the parcels created by this subdivision approval. The tax shall be the per parcel annual amount (with appropriate future CPI adjustment)then established at the time of voting by the Board of Supervisors. The election to provide for the tax shall be completed prior to the filing of the final map. The property owner shall be responsible for paying the cost of holding the election,payable at the time that the election is requested by 8 the owner. Allow a minimum of three to four months for processing. Grading Conditions 20. The building pads for the proposed buildings shall be generally the same as identified on the Final Development Plan,received by the Community Development Department March 20, 2006. Any changes to the final building pad elevations shall be subject to review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. All grading shall be balanced on site. Tree Conditions 21. The developer and applicant shall adhere to the following tree preservation standards required by Section 816-6.1202 of the County Code: A. Prior to the start of any clearing, stockpiling, trenching, grading, compaction,paving or change in ground elevation on a site with trees to be preserved, the applicant shall install fencing at the dripline or other area as determined by an arborist report of all trees adjacent to or in the area to be altered. Prior to grading or issuance of any permits, the fences may be inspected and the location thereof approved by appropriate County staff. B. No grading, compaction, stockpiling, trenching,paving or change in ground elevation shall be permitted within the dripline unless indicated on the grading plans approved by the County and addressed in any required report prepared by an arborist. If grading or construction is approved within the dripline, an arborist may be required to be present during grading operations. The arborist shall have the authority to require protective measures to protect the roots. Upon completion of grading and construction, an involved arborist shall prepare a report outlining further methods requiring for tree protection if any are required. All arborist expense shall be borne by the developer and applicant. C. No parking or storing vehicles, equipment,machinery or construction materials, construction trailers and no dumping of oils or chemicals shall be permitted within the dripline of any tree to be saved. 9 Landscaping 22. A landscaping and irrigation plan for all areas shall be submitted for review and approval of the Zoning Administrator at least 30 days prior to recording of Final Map. A cost estimate shall be submitted with the landscaping program plan. Landscaping shall conform to the County Water Conservation Landscape Ordinance 82-26 and shall be installed prior to approval of final building permit. The plan shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect and shall be certified to be in compliance with the County Water Conservation Ordinance. 23. California native drought tolerant plant or tree shall be used as much as possible. All trees shall be a minimum 15-gallon size, all shrubs shall be a minimum 10-gallon size, except as otherwise noted. 24. Front yard areas shall be suitably landscaped with scattered California native plant materials. A landscaping plan for these areas shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Landscaping in this area shall be installed prior to occupancy. 25. Prior to the recordation of the final map the applicant shall submit a cost estimate for the installation and purchase of all improvements,including installation of parking areas, and landscaping to the Zoning Administrator. The applicant shall submit a bond or cash deposit for 120% of the estimated cost to the Community Development Department. 26. _ Additional landscaping shall be planted along the frontage area of Pacheco Boulevard prior to occupancy on Lot 8. The landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Zoning Administrator prior to the recording of the Final Map. This is to provide a landscape buffer to help screen and provide privacy on Lot 8's eastern side yard that faces Pacheco Boulevard. Noise Conditions 27. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall construct a noise barrier consisting of a seven foot wall along the side and rear yards of Lots 7 and 8. It is important to encourage good community design, and achieve a positive aesthetic appearance along Pacheco Boulevard. To accomplish this goal, the applicant shall considered developing a stepped wall facing Pacheco Boulevard along Lot 8's eastern side yard. This would 10 soften the appearance along Pacheco Boulevard while being consistent with recently approved Planned Unit Developments in the immediate neighborhood. The applicant shall provide evidence from the acoustic consultant, Illingworth &Rodkin, Inc. that a stepped wall would reduce noise impacts the same way as the required 7 foot high noise barrier. If a stepped wall can't mitigated the noise impacts, then the applicant shall build the 7 foot high noise barrier as originally required by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. (Mitigation Measure XIa-1) 28. Where exterior noise levels range between 60 and 70 dBA Ldn, interior noise levels can typically be maintained below County standards (45 dBA Ld), with incorporation of an adequate forced air mechanical ventilation systems in the residential units to allow residents the option of controlling noise by maintaining the windows closed. At lot 8,the noise exposure of the fagade facing Pacheco Boulevard is projected to be 70 dBA Ldn. Sound rated window, door and wall are likely required to achieve the 45dBA Ldn interior noise limit. At lease 30 days prior to the issuance of a building permit for lot 8, the applicant shall submit a detailed analysis of the house plan prepared by a qualified acoustical specialist. (Mitigation Measure XIb-1). Construction Conditions 29. During construction require implementation of BAAQMD construction dust control measures such as the following: 1. Water all active construction sites at least twice daily. 2. Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soils, sand and other materials that can be blown by the wind daily. 3. Cover all trucks hauling soils, sand and other loose material or require all material-hauling trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. 4. Pave, apply water 3 times daily or apply non-toxic soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads,parking lots and staging areas at construction sites. Sweep street daily,preferably with water sweepers, if soil is carried onto adjacent streets. 30. In order to reduce the noise impacts during construction the following mitigation measures shall apply. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:30 A.M. to 5:00 P.M.,Monday through Friday, and shall be prohibited on 11 state and federal holidays on the calendar dates that these holidays are observed by the state or federal government as listed below: New Year's Day(State and Federal) Birthday of Martin Luther King, Jr. (State and Federal) Washington's Birthday (Federal) Lincoln's Birthday (State) President's Day (State) Cesar Chavez Day(State) Memorial Day(State and Federal) Independence Day(State and Federal) Labor Day(State and Federal) Columbus Day(State and Federal) Veterans Day(State and Federal) Thanksgiving Day(State and Federal) Day after Thanksgiving(State) Christmas Day(State and Federal) For specific details on the actual day the state and federal holidays occur, please visit the following websites: Federal Holidays http://www.opm.�ov/fedhol/2006.asp California Holidays http://www.edd.ca.gov/eddsthol.htm 31. Contractor and/or developer shall comply with the following construction,noise, dust and litter control requirements: A. All construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:30 A.M. to 5:30 P.M.,Monday through Friday, and shall be prohibited on state and federal holidays. B. The project sponsor shall require their contractors and subcontractors to fit all internal combustion engines with mufflers which are in good condition and shall locate stationary noise-generating equipment such as air compressors and concrete pumpers as far away from existing residences as possible. C. At least one week prior to commencement of grading, the applicant shall post the site and mail to the owners of property within 300 feet of the exterior boundary of the project site notice that construction work will commence. The notice shall include a list of contact persons with name, title,phone number and area of responsibility. The person responsible for maintaining the list shall be included. The 12 list shall be kept current at all times and shall consist of persons with authority to indicate and implement corrective action in their area of responsibility. The names of individ- uals responsible for noise and litter control, tree protection, construction traffic and vehicles, erosion control, and the 24-hour emergency number, shall be expressly identified in the notice. The notice shall be re-issued with each phase of major grading and construction activity. A copy of the notice shall be concurrently transmitted to the Community Development Department. The notice shall be accompanied by a list of the names and addresses of the property owners noticed, and a map identifying the area noticed. D. A dust and litter control program shall be submitted for the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. Any violation of the approved program or applicable ordinances shall require an immediate work stoppage. Construction work shall not be allowed to resume until, if necessary,an appropriate construction bond has been posted. E. The applicant shall make a good-faith effort to avoid interference with existing neighborhood traffic flows. Prior to issuance of building permits, the proposed roads serving this development shall be constructed to provide access to each portion of the development site. This shall include provision for an on-site area in which to park earth moving equipment. F. Transporting of heavy equipment and trucks shall be limited to weekdays between the hours of 9:00 AM and 4:00 PM. and prohibited on Federal and State holidays. G. The site shall be maintained in an orderly fashion. Following the cessation of construction activity, all construction debris shall be removed from the site. Geologic Conditions Landslide and Corrective Grading 32. All grading and drainage plans are subject to review of the County Geologist and the review and approval if the Zoning Administrator. The plans shall be prepared by appropriately licensed professionals. 13 r' 33. Unstable soils and landslides shall be removed within graded areas. Buttressing, keying and installation of debris benches shall be provided in the transition areas between open space areas. 34. During grading, the project engineering geologist shall observe and approve all keying excavations, removal of fill and landslide materials down to stable bedrock or in-place material, and installation of all subdrains including their connections. All fill slope construction shall be observed and tested by the project geotechnical engineer, and the density test results and reports submitted tot he County to be kept on file. Cut slopes and keyways shall be periodically observed and mapped by the project geotechnical and civil engineers who will provide any required slope modification recommendations based on the actual geologic conditions encountered during grading. Written approval from the Contra Costa County BID shall be obtained prior to any modification. 35. A grading completion report shall be submitted to BID by the project geotechnical engineers. These reports shall include the results and locations of all compaction tests, as-built plans of all landslide repairs and fill removal including geologic mapping of the exposed geology of all excavation showing cut cross-sections and sub-drain depths and locations. The lists of excavations approved by the engineering geologist shall also be submitted. Building permits shall not be issued without documentation that the grading and other pertinent work has been performed in accordance with the geotechnical report criteria and applicable Grading Ordinance provisions. 36. _ The recommendations for site grading contained in the approved geotechnical reports shall be followed during grading unless modifications are specifically approved in writing by the Building Inspection Department. 37. _ Grading, improvement erosion control and building plans shall employ as appropriate the following surface drainage measures in construction: asphalt or concrete-lined swales to carry runoff, fill slopes in excess of 10 feet high shall be graded to 2.5:1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter; positive grading of building pads for removal of surface water from foundation areas; individual pad drainage; collection of downspout water from roof gutters; avoidance of planted areas adjacent to structures; avoidance of sprinkler systems (as opposed to drip irrigation systems) in the vicinity of foundations; grading of slopes to eliminate over-the-bank runoff, 14 and re-vegetation of permanent slopes. Interim protective measures for runoff shall be followed during the construction phases when slopes are most susceptible to erosion. The final design shall incorporate subsurface drainage,measures, including the installation of subsurface drains within major new fills and landslide repair areas. 38. Concurrently with recordation of the Parcel Map, record a statement to run with deeds to the property acknowledging the Geotechnical Study by title, author(firm), and date, calling attention to conclusions, including the long-term maintenance requirements, and noting that the report is available to prospective buyers from seller of the parcel. Expansive and Corrosive Soils 39. Prior to issuance of building permits chemical testing or representative building pad soils shall be submitted to determine the level of corrosion protection required for steel and concrete materials used for construction. The following measures shall be implemented where appropriate to protect against corrosion: use of sulfate-resistant concrete and use of protective linings to encase steel piping buried in native soils. 40. The geotechnical engineer shall a)review and approve grading, drainage and foundation plans prior to issuance of construction permits to verify that the plans incorporate the geotechnical recommendations aimed at minimizing expansive soil effects and fill settlement on structures; and b) observe construction to assure compliance with recommendations in the approved geotechnical report. Signs/Walls/Lighting 41. _ All signs shall be subject to the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. No other outside displays are permitted. Construction and Demolition Debris 42. _ At least 30 days prior to the issuance of the building permit(s), the developer shall submit a"Debris Recovery Plan" demonstrating how they intend to recycle, reuse or salvage building materials and other debris generating from the demolition of existing building and/or the construction of new buildings. At least 30 days prior to the issuance of an Occupancy Permit, the developer shall submit a 15 completed"Debris Recovery Report" documenting actual debris recovery effects "including quantities of recovered and landfilled materials that occurred throughout the project's duration. Permit Compliance Report and Processing Fee 43. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall provide a permit compliance report to the Community Development Department of the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The report shall identify all conditions of approval that are administrated by the Community Development Department. The report shall document the measures taken by the applicant to satisfy all the relevant conditions. Copies of the permit conditions may be obtained on a computer file from the Community Development Department by contacting the project manager. 44. The permit compliance review is subject to staff time and material charges, with an initial deposit of$1,000 for a major subdivision, which shall be paid at time of submittal of the compliance report. Checks may be made payable to the County of Contra Costa. PUBLIC WORKS RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR SUBDIVISION 8944 Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Title 8, Title 9, and Title 10 of the County Ordinance Code. Any exceptions must be stipulated in these conditions of approval. Conditions of Approval are based on the Revised Tentative Map dated March 20, 2006. COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO RECORDATION OF THE FINAL MAP. General Requirements: 45. In accordance with Section 92-2.006 of the Ordinance Code, this subdivision shall conform to all applicable provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 9). Any exceptions therefrom must be specifically listed in this conditional approval statement. The drainage, road and utility improvements outlined below shall require the review and approval of the Public Works Department and are based on the Revised Tentative Map dated March 20, 2006. 46. Applicant shall submit improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer to the Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division, along with review and inspection fees, and security for all improvements required by the 16 f Ordinance Code for the conditions of approval of this subdivision. These plans shall include any necessary traffic signage and striping plans for review by the Transportation Engineering Division. Roadway Improvements (Frontage): 47. Applicant shall construct concrete curb, 6.5-foot wide sidewalk(width measured from curb face to back of walk), any necessary longitudinal and transverse drainage, and any pavement widening and transitions that may be required along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard. The face of curb shall be located 10 feet from the ultimate right of way line. 48. Applicant shall construct a 20-foot radius concrete curb return at the southwest corner of the proposed private road and Pacheco Boulevard intersection. 49. Applicant shall construct a curb ramp at the southerly return of the intersection of the proposed private road and Pacheco Boulevard. 50. Applicant shall install safety related improvements on all streets (including traffic signs and striping) as approved by Public Works. 51. Retaining walls associated with the project shall be completely located outside public road right of way(including footings) Private Roadway(On-Site): 52. Applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system that meets current County private road standards with a minimum traveled way width of 28 feet within a 50- foot access easement, as shown on the revised tentative map. The minimum width of the proposed sidewalk shall be five feet(width measured from curb face). 53. Applicant shall construct or demonstrate that a paved turnaround exists (within a permanent private road easement) in accordance with County private road standards at the end of the proposed private road, subject to the review of the Fire District. 54. Applicant shall develop and enter into a private road maintenance agreement that will insure that the proposed private road will be maintained and that each lot in this subdivision will share in its maintenance. 55. Applicant shall record an easement over the proposed private road granting legal access to the adjacent property owner(s) of Tract 7418 to the north. 56. Applicant shall record a deed notification to inform all future property owners within this subdivision of the existence of an easement granting the adjacent property owner(s) to the north and adjacent property owner to the southwest legal 17 access to use the proposed private road. The deed notification shall inform all future property owners that the adjacent property owner(s) to the north shall have a legal obligation to share in the maintenance of the proposed private road. Access to Adjoining Property: Proof of Access 57. Applicant shall furnish proof to Public Works of the acquisition of all necessary rights of way, rights of entry,permits and/or easements for the construction of off-site, temporary or permanent, public and private road and drainage improvements. 58. Applicant shall furnish proof to Public Works that legal access to the property is available from Pacheco Boulevard. 59. Applicant shall relinquish abutter's rights of access along Pacheco Boulevard, with the exception of the private road intersection. Encroachment Permit 60. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Application and Permit Center for construction of improvements within the right of way of Pacheco Boulevard. Road Dedications: 61. Applicant shall convey to the County,by Offer of dedication,the right of way necessary.for the planned future width of 84 feet along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard. Sight Distance: 62. Applicant shall provide sight distance at the intersection of the private road and Pacheco Boulevard for a through traffic design speed of 45 miles per hour. Landscaping, walls, fences, signs, or other obstructions must be placed to maintain adequate sight distance. Pedestrian Facilities: 63. All proposed curb ramps shall be designed and constructed in accordance with current County standards. A detectable warning surface (e.g. truncated domes) shall be installed on all curb ramps. Adequate right of way shall be dedicated to accommodate the minimum 4-foot landing at the top of any curb ramp proposed. 18 64. Applicant shall design all public and private pedestrian facilities in accordance with Title 24 (Handicap Access) and the Americans with Disabilities Act. This shall include all sidewalks, paths, driveway depressions, and pedestrian ramps. Parking: 65. Parking shall be prohibited on one side of any private road where the curb-to-curb width is less than 36 feet and on both sides of any private road where the curb-to- curb width is less than 28 feet. "No Parking" signs shall be installed along these portions of the road subject to the review and approval of Public Works. Maintenance of Facilities: 66. Applicant shall develop and enter into a maintenance agreement that will insure that the proposed private roadway(Weatherly Lane) and any street lights will be maintained and that each parcel in this subdivision that will use the proposed private roadway(Weatherly Lane) and street lights, if any, will share in its maintenance. 67. Applicant shall record a Statement of Obligation, in the form of a deed notification, to inform all future property owners of their legal obligation to maintain the private roadway(Weatherly Lane) and street lights, if any. Street Lights: 68. Applicant shall apply for annexation to County Service Area L-100 Lighting District by submitting: a letter of request; a metes and bounds description; and pay the current LAFCO fees. Annexation shall occur prior to filing of the final map. The applicant shall be aware that this annexation process must comply with State Proposition 218 requirements, which state that the property owner must hold a special election to approve the annexation. This process may take approximately 4-6 months to complete. Underground Utilities: 69. All new utility distribution facilities shall be installed underground. Landscaping: 70. Applicant shall develop and enter into a maintenance agreement that will insure that the proposed parkway strip within the public road right of way of Pacheco Boulevard will be maintained in perpetuity. 71. Applicant shall apply to Public Works for annexation to the County Landscaping District AD 1979-3 (LL-2) for the future maintenance of public landscaping and automatic irrigation facilities prior to filing of the Final Map. 19 Drainage Improvements: Collect and Convey 72. Applicant shall collect and convey all stormwater entering and/or originating on this property without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage facility, to a natural watercourse having definable bed and banks, or to an existing adequate public storm drainage facility which conveys the storm waters to a natural watercourse, in accordance with Division 914 of the Ordinance Code. 73. Applicant shall demonstrate that the existing downstream drainage system(s) that receives storm water run-off from this project is adequate to convey the required design storm (based on the size of the contributing watershed) and, if necessary, construct improvements to guarantee adequacy. The property is located within Drainage Area 57,which is known to have inadequate drainage facilities, particularly those downstream of the proposed subdivision. Improvements shall be consistent with the adopted Drainage Area 57 storm drain plan. The applicant is encouraged to work with other developments in the area to coordinate drainage infrastructure improvements. Provision "C.3" of the NPDES Permit 74. In compliance with the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, it has been determined that this project does not require submittal of a Stormwater Control Plan(SWCP). New or redeveloped impervious surface area proposed in this application totals less than one acre (43,560 square feet), which is the threshold for submittal of a SWCP. However, this project is required to incorporate storm water quality elements to the Maximum Extent Practicable (NiEP). This must include efforts to limit new impervious surface area, limit directly connected impervious areas,provide for self retaining areas and include other Best Management Practices to the MEP. Miscellaneous Drainage Requirements: 75. Any new drainage facilities-shall be designed and constructed in accordance with specifications outlined in Division 914 and in compliance with design standards ,of the Public Works Department. 76. Applicant shall prevent storm drainage from draining across the sidewalk(s) and driveway(s) in a concentrated manner. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): 77. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) for 20 municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay Region or Central Valley Region). Compliance will include developing long-term best management practices (BMP's) for the reduction or elimination of storm water pollutants. The project design shall incorporate some or all of the following long term BMP's in accordance with the Contra Costa County Clean Water Program for the site's storm water drainage. - Stencil advisory warnings on all catch basins. - Minimize the amount of directly connected impervious surface area. - Slope pavements to direct runoff to landscaped/pervious areas. - Provide educational materials regarding the Clean Water Program to new homebuyers. - Prohibit or discourage direct connection of roof and area drains to storm drain systems. Provide options for grass pavers or other semi-pervious paving systems for walks, drives, and patios. - Other alternatives, equivalent to the above, as approved by the Public Works Department. ADVISORY NOTES PLEASE NOTE ADVISORY NOTES ARE ATTACHED TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL BUT ARE NOT A PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. ADVISORY NOTES ARE PROVIDED FOR THE PURPOSE OF INFORMING THE APPLICANT OF ADDITIONAL ORDINANCE AND OTHER LEGAL :REQUIREMENTS THAT MUST BE MET IN ORDER TO PROCEED WITH DEVELOPMENT. A. Additional requirements may be imposed by the Fire District or the Building Inspection Department. It is advisable to check with these departments prior to requesting a building permit or proceeding with the project. B. The Building Inspection Department will require three sets of building plans which must be stamped by the Community Development Department and by the Sanitary District; or if the site is not within a Sanitary District, by the County Health Department. C. Vesting Tentative Map Rights - The approval of this vesting tentative map confers a vested right to proceed with development in substantial compliance with ordinances,policies, and standards in effect as of March 20, 2006, the date the 21 vesting tentative map application was accepted as complete by the Community Development Department. The vested rights also apply to development fees which the County has adopted by ordinance. These fees are in addition to any other development fees which may be specified in the conditions of approval. The fees include but are not limited to the following: Park Dedication $2,000.00 per residence. Child Care $ 400.00 per residence. School Fees TBD An. estimate of the fee charges for each approved lot may be obtained by contacting the Building Inspection Department at 335-1192. D. Expiration of Vested Rights: Pursuant to Section 66452.6(g) of the Subdivision Map act, the rights conferred by the vesting tentative map as provided by Chapter 4.5 of the Subdivision Map act shall last for an initial period of two (2) years following the recording date of the final/parcel map. These rights pertain to development fees and regulations. Where several final maps are recorded on various phases of a project covered by a single vesting tentative map, the initial time period shall begin for each phase when the final map for that phase is recorded. At any time prior to the expiration of the initial time period, the subdivider may apply for a one-year extension. The application shall be accompanied by the applicable filing fee. If the extension is denied by an advisory agency, the subdivider may appeal that denial to the Board of Supervisors by filing a letter of appeal with the appropriate filing fee with the Clerk of the Board within 10 calendar days. The initial time period may also be subject to automatic extension pursuant to other provisions of Section 66452.6(g)relating to processing of related development applications by the County. At the expiration of the vesting time period,remaining development(i.e.,new building permits)within the subdivision shall be subject to development fees and regulations in effect at that time. E. The applicant shall be required to comply with all rules, regulations, and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Systems (NPDES) for municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board, or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards (San Francisco Bay-Region II). F. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Department of Fish and Game. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the Department of Fish and 22 Game, P.O. Box 47, Yountville, California 94599, of any proposed construction within this development that may affect any fish and wildlife resources,per the Fish and Game Code. G. This project may be subject to the requirements of the Army Corps of Engineers. It is the applicant's responsibility to notify the appropriate district of the Corps of Engineers to determine if a permit is required, and if it can be obtained. H. Comply with the Bridge/Thoroughfare Fee Ordinance requirements for the Martinez Area of Benefit as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. This fee must be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. I. The applicant shall comply with the drainage fee requirements for Drainage Area 57 as adopted by the Board of Supervisors. These fees must be paid prior to filing a Final Map. WCurrent Planning\curr-plan\Staff Reports\SD058944 coa.doc RMP/dls 3/21/06 mp 6/14/06 23 STAFF REPORT COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MARCH 28 , 2006 m Agenda Item#�' Community Development Department Contra Costa County CONTRA COSTA COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 2006 I. INTRODUCTION DAVID O. ISAKSON(Applicant)—WILLIAM KELLEHER(Owner) This project consists of the following related applications: A. County File#RZ053154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple Residential—M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District—P-1 Zoning District with xvariance to the five acre minimum. B. County File#DP053002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences (1787 and 1871 square feet) on 1.10 acres of property. C. County File#SD058944: The applicant requests approval to subdivide 1.10 acres•into eight single-family lots ranging in size from 5000 to 7687 square feet. The subject property's address is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez area. (Zoning: M-12) (Zoning Atlas: G-13) (Census Tract: 3200.02) (Assessor Parcel Number: 161-270-011). II. RECOMMENDATION Adopt a motion: A. That on the basis of the whole record before it, including the Initial Study and the comments received,the Planning Commission finds that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the mitigated negative declaration reflects the County's independent judgment and analysis. The documents or other material that constitute the record of proceedings upon which the Planning Commission's decision is based may be found at the Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA under the custodian of the project planner,Rose Marie Pietras (925) 335-1216. B. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project for the purposes of compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program. C. Recommend that the Board of Supervisors approve the rezoning from Multiple Family Residential -M-12 to Planned Unit District, P-1. D. Adopt the findings and approve the proposed Preliminary and Final Development Plan with conditions. E. Adopt the findings and approve the proposed Vesting Tentative Map with conditions. III. GENERAL INFORMATION A. General Plan: The General Plan designation is Multiple-Family Residential Low-Density(ML). Allowed density is 7.3 to 11.9 dwelling units/net acre. B. Zoning: Multiple Family Residential (M-12). C. CEQA: A Mitigated Negative Declaration was posted at the County Clerk's Office on December 15, 2005 and concurrently mailed to the owners of adjoining properties. The public comment period ended on January 9, 2006. However, staff discovered that the noise mitigations were inadvertently not included and therefore posted at the County Clerk's Office a revised mitigated negative declaration on February 8, 2006 and concurrently mailed to the owners of adjoining properties. The public comment period ended on February 28, 2006. No comments on environmental issues were received from the surrounding neighbors. A letter dated January 5, 2006 was received from the Law Offices of Candice E. Stoddard representing H &B Property Solutions, LLC, the owners of Greenridge Estate Subdivision—County File#SD7418 regarding easement rights for the use of private roadways. Although their concern is not an environmental issue, staff arranged a meeting at the Public Works Department on February 8, 2006 between county staff, the applicant, Candice E. Stoddard and the owners of Greenridge Estate to go over their issues. We concluded that the neighbors' concerns regarding the private road easement agreements are a civil issue between both parties. Both parties have agreed to work together to resolve this matter. S-2 D. Previous Projects: • LP012105—Home Occupation • PR030022—For Residential Care Facility 9 LP042020-Residential Care Facility E. "Regulatory Programs: 1. Flood Zone: The majority of the site is located within Flood Zone C of minimal flooding—Panel#280. 2. Active Fault Zone: The subj ect property is not located within the Alquist Prio1'o earthquake fault zone. 1 '1600A Noise"Control: The subject property is located within the 60dBA noise control'zone ` IV. SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is a 1.1-acre parcel. The property is located on the southwestern side of Pacheco Boulevard, approximately 3500 feet north of Highway 4 and 1000 feet,south of the Burlington Santa Fe(BNSF)Railroad tracks, within the unincorporated area of Contra Costa County, north of the City of Martinez. The street address is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard. The property has a conventional wood-frame house along the top of the slope at the southwestern end of the property. Below the existing house are some narrow terraces with a few derelict fruit trees. V. AREA DESCRIPTION The proposed project is surrounded by suburban portions of the'City of Martinez and unincorporated Contra Costa County, and includes the following: ➢ North. A 20 Lot subdivision consisting of single family homes zoned P-1 Unit District presently under construction. ➢ East. Across Pacheco Boulevard, land usesinclude a church and small areas of open space abutting the I-680 highway that appear to be relatively undeveloped. ➢ South. To the south of the project site is Sunrise Business Park. ➢ West. Three single family residences. S-3 VI. PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project is a residential-development that consists of 8 single family detached homes and associated,landscaping, and a private roadway. Residential Development. The proposed project consists of 8,single-family homes on individual lots. Gross residential density would be 6.4 to 10.4 units per acre. A Development Plan:and Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map are being requested by the applicant. The development would consist of.eight residences along Weatherly Place, a private road. The houses would be 1787 square feet on an average lot size approximately 4,475..square feet.,:-The houses would be two stories (maximum height of 35 feet),have four bedrooms, and a two-car garage. The,project includes two different style homes, each with four elevation options, for a total of eight different buildings. The overall theme is Mediterranean stucco siding. Details include shutters, window trims and pot shelves. Each home has a small covered entry porch. Roofs will be concrete tile with pitches of 5:12 or better. Garage and entry doors will be paneled and some will include translucent lights. Colors will be coordinated throughout and will be muted to be consistent with the Mediterranean theme. Each unit includes a private yard area with a minimum dimension.of 37':...Front yard areas along Weatherly Lane are extremely,spacious. Lot.7.& 8 will be provided with a solid 7' high sound barrier meeting the noise mitigations required in the Mitigated Negative Declaration posted on February 8,2006 per the sound study prepared by Illingworth &Rodkin, Inc dated June 1, 2005. The sound barrier can be accomplished with overlapping wood so that no gaps arepresent. a. Landscaping and Open Space. Modular key-stoned block walls would be constructed fronting Pacheco Boulevard, and planted with flowering shrubs, groundcover, and accent planting. The front yard on each home will be landscaped by the developer. Retaining walls would be utilized,but would be generally hidden behind and between units. Where visible, retaining walls would be of decorative design. All tree sizes will be a minimum of 5 gallons. Similar landscaping would be planted at the entries to each residence, street trees would be planted along Weatherly Lane. "Good neighbor"fences (finished both sides)would be built along lot lines. The maintenance of the private road shall be shared equally by all eight home owners and specified in the CC&R's. b.. Transportation, Circulation and Parking. A private road, Weatherly Lane, off Pacheco Boulevard would provide access to the site. The road would run east to west on the north side of the project. The project has been S-4 r designed to accommodate the realignment of Pacheco Boulevard as planned by the Public Works Department. The private road would be 36 feet wide (curb to curb); this would allow parking on the southern side of the road. A total of eight on street parking spaces would be provided in.addition to the code requirement of two parking spaces per dwelling unit. c. Drainage Area 57 Improvements. The Public Works Department requested verification of the adequacy of the existing 367-storm drain system in Pacheco Boulevard. The downstream system has already been determined to be inadequate by the Flood Control District. According to the Drainage Area.57 drainage .plan for Line B, right of way and;improvements are required from station 4+10+/-upstream to station.11+50. These improvements require the Installation of 180 feet of jacked 72" RCP beneath the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railway; creating 270 feet of earth channel by filling an existing Swale,.110 feet,-of 72"CMP with paved invert-and excavating.-180 feet of.earth channel:a Right of way:acquisition varies from 13 feet to 40 feet in width=along the improvements. .The cost to construct these downstream improvements would create undue hardship for the development of 8 new homes as proposed Subdivsion 8944. The construction of the downstream improvements and right of way acquisition has been designed to be financed from the fees collected by Drainage Area 57. Therefore, the applicant is requesting an exception to the collect and convey -requirementfor the following reasons: 1. The increase in impervious surface created approximately by this development is anticipated to be 34,480 square feet(eight lots plus Pacheco Boulevard widening). 2. By allowing the development to proceed and pay the drainage area 57 fee, additional funds will be raised to finance construction of the downstream improvements. d. Site Preparation. Site preparation would include the demolition of the existing house and underground utilities. Grading would be balanced on site. e. Construction and Phasing. Details of the construction and phasing are not known at this time. For purposes of this analysis it is assumed that construction would take 15 to 18 months: S-5 VII. AGENCY.COMMENTS 1. Mt.�View Sanitary District: Memorandum dated January 25, 2005. See attached. 2. California Historical Resources Information-S, sem: Memorandum dated January 26, 2005. The proposed project area has a low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). Therefore, no further study for archaeological resources is recommended. The proposed project area may contain historical resources. (Upon staff s field visit no historical structures were present on the site.) The guidelines for implementation of the California Register of Historical Resources�(Cal Register) criteria.for evaluation of historical properties have been developed by the State Office of Historical Preservation. For purposes of CEQA, all identified-sites should be evaluated using the Cal Register criteria. We recommend you contact the local Native American Tribes (s) regarding traditional;:cultural, and religious values: For a complete listing of tribes in:the vicinity of the project, please contact the Native American Heritage Commission. >Review forpossible historic structures was limited to the Northeast Information Center documents and should not be considered comprehensive. Since the Office of.Historic Preservation has determined that any building or structure 45 years or older may be.of historic:value, if the project area contains such properties it is recommended that they be evaluated by an architectural historian prior to commencement of project activities. 3. Contra Costa County Sheriff: Memorandum dated February 1, 2004. No comments. 4. Pacheco Municipal Advisory Committee: Memorandum,dated June 15, 2004. Good use of the property and excellent home style. '5. Building Inspection Department- Grading Division: Memorandum dated February 7, 2005. Lot 2 lower than street., Retaining,walls with 5' wall required at lots 1 /2, 6 /7, 7/ 8. Verify fence locations. Grading plans and permit, geotechnical investigation and report,NPDES:permit. 6. City of Martinez: Memorandum dated February 7, 2005. See attached. 7. Public Works Department/EngineerinServices: Memorandum dated February.8, April 28, June 20, 2005 and March 20, 2006.`See attached 8. Contra Costa Coun Fire Protection District: Memorandum dated February 103 2005. See attached. S-6 r � 9. Public Works Dppartment/Flood Control: Flood Plain Manager: Memorandum dated March 7, 2005. See attached. VIII. CALIFORINIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT The Mitigated Negative Declaration-for the proposed development identified potentially significant impacts in the following environmental areas: Staff has summarized key areas discussed in the mitigated negative declaration in the following sections. IX. GEOLOGICAL A Preliminary Geotechnical Report was prepared by'Diablo'Engineers, Inc., dated January 28, 2005, and a peer review of the above report was prepared by County Geologist,Darwin Myers Associates dated February 11 2005."10ctober 17 2005 In-responsetoDarwin Myers concerns;the applicant submitted a`Slope Stabiltiy Analysis & Grading Recommendations Report dated September 12;'2005. Landslide and Corrective Gradin The site is an upland property that is within the outcrop belt of mudstone and shale formation of-Early Tertiary age. Based on reconnaissance level data (chiefly geologic-interpretation of vertical angle aerial photographs);-the U.S. Geological Survey(Nielsen, 1975) concluded that the entire property is within a massive(bedrock?) landslide."The`USGS (Ellen and Wentworth, 1995)concludes that the soil mantle and bedrock are expansive and possess adverse engineering characteristic. The mapping of the California Geological Survey(Haydon, 1995) considers the site to be within a slide area within the outcrop belt of the Meganos Formation. According to the CGS report; slope stability of this unit is judged to be:moderate to poor and surficial soil is poor. Slide planes can occur in deeper, less weathered,•less fractured rock. The CGS reportindicates that the formation occurring on°the site is rated highest landslide susceptibility, and the CGS-report recommends detailed, comprehensive geologic,and geotechnical analysis for all land development projects in lands classified highest damage susceptibility; a conservative approach to grading is needed if long-term stability is to be achieved. Based on slope stability analysis,Cal Engineering & Geology concludes that the project is feasible. Figure 4 of their report provides a geologic cross-section; Figure 5 presents a corrective grading plan; and Figure 6 presents Remedial Grading Sections &Details. The Cal Engineering & Geology report indicates that the remediation plan will yield adequate safety factors. Cal Engineering & Geology also recommends that they be provided the opportunity to review plans S-7 prior to issuance of construction permits to ensure consistency with the intent of- geotechnical recommendations; and that the,geotechnical engineer observe grading and perform testing to provide documentation of the as-built condition; and to make supplemental recommendations of exposed conditions require changes to the approved grading plans. The peer review geologist of the County considers the geologic and geotechnical data sufficient to define the landslide and grading impacts and to.identify detailed-mitigation measures. X. NOISE The applicant submitted an Environmental Noise Assessment dated June 1,2005 prepared by Illingworth &Rodkin, Inc. The assessment presents the noise and laird use compatibility criteria developed by Contra Costa County,the results of existing noise monitoring on the site, and the evaluation of mitigation measures required to achieve.compatibility with the Contra Costa County criteria. "Contra Costa Noise Element Guidelines: The Noise Element of the Contra Costa County GeneralPlan presents, goals and policies forther development of noise sensitive1and uses in.the County..The applicable noise policies are Policies 11-2 and 11-4. Policy 11-2 of the Noise Element states that the standard for outdoor noise levels in residential areas is an Ldn of 60dB. However; an Ldn of 60dB or less may not be achievable in all residential areas due to economic or aesthetic constraints. Policy 11-4,states that Title-24, Part 2, of the California Code of Regulations.requires that new multiple family housing projects,hotels anal motels exposed-to ran Ldnof 60dB or greater have a-detailed acoustical analysis describing how the project will provide an interior Ldn of 45dB,or less. The County shall also require new single-family housing projects to provide.for interior Ldn of 45 or less. The County shall also require,new single-family housing for an interior Ldn of 45dB i.or less. The County normally desires to achieve outdoor noise levels in residential areas not in excess of an Ldn of 60 dB :.and interior noise levels not in excess of.an Ldn of 45 dB. Existing Noise Environment ~.The project site is currently affected by noise generated along Pacheco Boulevard as well as Interstate..680 and potentially the Atchison, Topeka & Santa,Fe Railroad. A long-term noise measurement (LT-1) and two concurrent short-term measurements were conducted on Thursday,,May 12, 2005.. The location of these noise measurements is.containedin Attachment 1 of the submitted report. In addition, Attachment 2 of the report shows the noise levels at LT-1 collected during a 24-hour period. This measurement location is representative of the noise exposure of the lot closest to Pacheco Boulevard. Daytime hourly average noise levels typically range from 65 to 70,dBA. The Ldn at the long-term measurement location was 73dBA during weekends. The noise levels for the two short-term measurements with the concurrent long-term interval are shown in Table 3 of the report. S-8 r v The,project site is about 1300 feet from.the Atchison,:Topeka& Santa'Fe Railroad,•which is well beyond the 65.0 foot 60Ldn noise•contour reported in the Contra Costa County General Plan. The Ldn noise level resulting from the train at the,project site is too low to affect,the Ldn generated by.the other major noise sources. Future Noise Environment: Future traffic volumes were unavailable from the County. Traffic volumes on Pacheco Boulevard just:south of Arnold Drive from I9198and 2003 were available..iOver that,five year period, traffic volumes increased by 12%. At that rate of growth, future noise levels are proj ected to increase by about 1dBA on Pacheco Boulevard over the next.tento fifteen years. The project Ldn,at the measurement location would be 74 dBA,in the future. There would be a temporary increase in noise levels ifthe applicant decides to demolish or remodel the existing-residences. Thes&,impacts are considered less than significant due-to Aheir short duration The�prcject would be conditioned to require that steps be taken to reduce construction noise such as fitting engines with,mufflers,limiting the hours of construction and-transport of materials and machinery and locating noise producing equipmentas far from residences'as possible. The site is not in the vicinity of a public.use airport or private airstrip and is not contained in an airport land use plan." XI. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSIDERATIONS The Public Works Department forwarded a series of comments dated February 8, April 28, and June 20, 2005 and March 20, 2006 with the following comments. Background The applicant proposes to esubdivide an approximately 1.10 acre parcel into 8 lots at 4776 Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez area. The site is located,between Sunrise Drive and Weatherly Lane,proposed as part of Tract'7418 adjacent to the subject parcel. Lot 1 contains the'existing residence, while new construction is proposed for the remaining seven lots. The site has a steep down slope to the east, towards Pacheco Boulevard. Traffic and Circulation The property fronts on Pacheco Boulevard,which has a current pavement-.width of 34 feet within a 60-foot right of way and a planned ultimate pavement width of 64 feet within an 84 foot right of way per the Pacheco Boulevard Precise Alignment(PA 3951-68) on the file with the Public Works Department. The applicant shall dedicate the necessary right of way to provide for the ultimate S-9 width of 84 feet and construct-frontage improvements (i.e. curb,'gutter,sidewalk, landscape strip, and necessary pavement widening) along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard,similar to those required for Tract 7418. The applicant shall construct a.20-foot radius concrete curb return at the southwest-corner ofthe intersection of the proposed private road and Pacheco Boulevard as well as a curb ramp in accordance with current County standards. The applicant proposes to construct a combined_access road with a 50;foot right of way to serveahis project,the adjacent projectto`the north(Tract 7418), and the adjacent property to the southwest. The applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system#hat meets current County private road standards with a .m:inimum traveled way width of 28 feet within°at50-foot access=easement, as shown on the Revised Tentative Map. The minimum width of the proposed sidewalk alongahe private road shall be five feet(width measured from curb face) and shall widen to 6.5 feet;along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard: The ` applicant shall_construct a paved turnaround in accordance with County private road-standards at end of the.proposed private road, subject to-the review of the Fire District,if sufficient emergency vehicle-:access is not already in-place-as part of Tract,7418 (ie,KingswoodLane and Ranchita,Lane). An easement shall be recorded over the proposed private road granting legal access to the adjacent property.owner(s) of Tract 7418 to the north. In turn, legal rights to access the subject property from Pacheco Boulevard must also be verified. To limit direct driveway access to Pacheco Boulevard, abutter's rights of access shall be relinquished along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard,with the exception of the proposed private road=intersection Drainage Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code requires all storm water entering arid/or originating on this property to be collected and conveyed without diversion and within an adequate storm drainage system,to an adequate natural watercourse having a definable bed:and banks, or to an existing adequate public storm drainage system which conveys.the storm waters to an adequate natural' watercourse. The applicant shall verify the adequacy of any downstream drainage facility accepting storm water from this project prior to discharging runoff. The property is located:within Drainage Area 57,which is known to have inadequate drainage facilities,particularly those downstream of the proposed.subdivision.If the downstream system(s) is/are not adequate to handle the existing plus project condition for the required design storm, improvements shall be constructed to make the system adequate. Improvements shall be consistent with the adopted Drainage Area 57 storm drain plan. The.applicant is encouraged to work with other developments in the area to coordinate drainage infrastructure improvements. S-10 Stormwater Management In compliance with the County's Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, it has been determined that this project does not require submittal of a Stormwater Control Plan(SWOP). New or redeveloped impervious surface area proposed in this application totals less than one acre (43,560 square feet), which is the threshold for submittal of a SWOP. However, this project is required to incorporate storm water quality elements to the Maximum Extent Practicable (MEP). This must include efforts to limit new impervious surface area, limit directly connected impervious areas,provide for self retaining areas and include other BestManagement Practices to the MEP. XII. VARIANCE TO THE PLANNED UNIT DISTRICT Pursuant to the-County Planned Unit District Ordinance'Code, Article 84.66.6 Site Minimums,&ction 84-66.602 Areas. The minimum areas for a P-1 district are: Residential: Five acres'for residential uses. The intent and purpose of the P-1 district is to promote flexibility from the requirements of standard zoning-.in relationship to good community design and spatial development. To accomplish this, the proposed development should encourage diversity with varied lot Pand house sizes, open space and landscaping. The County's Planned Unit Ordinance was originally intended to accommodate large developments. However, with the build out of the County sizable growth is diminishing. It has become difficult for developers to find five acre parcels in areas designated for growth that meet the minimum land area for a P-1 district. Therefore, the County has been increasingly granting variances for less than a five acre minimum for a P-l rezone. XIII. STAFF ANALYSIS/DISCUSSION A. Appropriateness of Use: The project site is 1.10 acres,mostly vacant with one single-family home. The General Plan designation for the project site is Multi-Family Low Density,which allows between 7.3 to 11.9 multi-family units per net acre. The access off of Pacheco Boulevard nets out to be 1.17 acres of private roadway. The net acreage of the property minus the roadway amounts to .88 acres. The proposed project is for 8 single-family units at a gross density range of 6.4 to 10.4 units per net acre. Through the Development Plan approval process, the County has the discretion to allow single-family homes on property designated for multi-family residential use. 5-11 The subject site is surrounded by a mixture of uses consisting primarily of single family residential. This application.can be characterized as an infill project. To the north of the subject property is a subdivision zoned P-1, presently in process of being developed consisting-of 20 single-family lots. B. Site Plan Analysis: The development would consist of 8 single family lots. .Three different single-family,;detached, housing types would be developed. The houses would be.for Plan 1 - 1787 square feet; Plan 2— 1871 square feet with an maximum lot size of 5,987 square feet, minimumlot size of 4,000 square feet and a average lot size of 4,734 square feet. In order to reduce outdoor and indoor noise impacts and meet General Plan Policies 11-2 and 114;the applicant is required to construct a 7.foot wall, along the side and year yards of lot 7 and 8. In staff's opinion it is important to encourage good community design, and achieve a positive aesthetic appearance along Pacheco Boulevard. To accomplish this goal, the applicant shall consider developing a stepped wall facing Pacheco Boulevard along Lot 8's side yard. This would soften the appearance along Pacheco Boulevard while being consistent with recently approved Planned Unit Developments in the immediate neighborhood.- However,the applicant shall provide evidence from Illingworth&Rodkin, Inc.that a stepped wall would reduce noise impacts the same way as the required 7 foot high noise barrier. If a stepped wall can't mitigated the noise impacts,then the applicant shall build the 7 foot high noise barrier as originally required by Illingworth&Rodkin, Inc. XIV. CONCLUSION With the implementation of the Mitigation Monitoring Program, the whole of the project does not adversely affect the environment. The density is achieved in a fashion that promotes single-family detached residences. These houses share a private road, Weatherly Place. The houses.will have both front and private rear yard areas. Overall the project meets the intent of the proposed P-1 zoning and the General Plan Multi Family Residential—Low designation. GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Staff Reports\SD058944 sr.doc S-12 PERTINENT CORRESPONDENCE C f af' _ Dennis M. Barry, AICP 0 m m u n ity Contra Community Development Director Development s Costa EcavED Department CoUrlj/ JAN 2 1 20Q County Administration Building sE............ 651 Pine Street ;, D MVSD 4th Floor,North Wing = - Martinez,California 94553-0095 (925)335-1210 Date. ;.. avt . )4' t Phone: AGENCY COMMENT REQUEST Werequest your comments regarding the attached application currently under review. ' j DISTRIBUTION Please submit your comments as follows: Z Building Inspection HSD,Environmental Health,Concord Project Planner _HSD,Hazardous Materials c�q 4 P/W - Flood Control (Full Size) County File 0 O Z- P/W - Engineering.Svcs (Full Size) Number: Date Forwarded + _P/W Traffic(Reduced) Prior To: �L6( 1a'v ( / P/W Special Districts(Reduced) ,ZComprehensive Planning We have found the following�scial programs Redevelopment Agency apply to this application: i!'`Historical Resources Information System CA Native Amer.Her. Comm. Redevelopment Area _CA Fish & Game,Region _US Fish &Wildlife Service Active Fault Zone ,/Fire District C0vt Sb 1 i da.4-f-d Sanitary District MT i/i`r?,cc? Flood Hazard Area,Panel# 2 � �,lWater District _(00 or Cc?5 uk Y City_ '- i vie - 60 dBA Noise Control ,'School District M CA r"4-i vte.'z_ kw E .Z Sheriff Office-Admin. & Comm. Svcs. CA EPA Hazardous Waste Site Alamo Improvement Association EMAC rap ' l; Committee Traffic Zone _DOIT -Dep. Director, Communications CEQA Exempt CAC R-7A Alamo Categorical Exemption Section Community Organizations , V, Please indicate the code section of recommendations that are required by law or ordinance. Please send copies of your response to the Applicant& Owner. _No comments on this application. Our Comments are attached Comments:. A 11Lr "Latu�r�e BIZ 53-r-1cl Agency. _ current niannin2/temni9tes/inrrnsi2genev comment revues. L aL� a A f Y - Pli.�f IEW MOP05 JAN 31 P11 2: January 25, 2005 fl{S1flICi , 4 Contra Costa County '1 j Maii=Cffbrna1ouoded1923 Community Development Department Attn: Rose Marie Pietras,Project Planner 651 Pine Street, 4h Floor,North Wing Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Subject: Tentative Map Subdivision 8944' { � Weatherly Place .h Y , f x � ilia}caoi Dear Ms.Pietras, ME 1, Thank you for providing the Mt. View Sanitary District with a copy of the tentative map;for 6Ayy`px '+ ° the referenced subdivision. 4 011R1V:lA' U'avA Y,iry( 41, eE€Rid ,�' , We have the following comments on this application. ` 1. Existingsewer service shall be plugged and abandoned at the main prior to radin . P gg p g g ,Iaur=ffivp 2. The Developer shall construct a main line extension in Weatherly Lane from the 15 "trunk' ATrroxxaxhE sewer line in Pacheco Blvd. in accordance with District Standard Specifications. 204 3. Each building shall be served with a separate side-sewer connected to the main. The side- V, s �,� Rando�ph W Leptlen sewer to the existing building shall be tested by air for compliance with D> trio=standards. aENcweaR If it doesn't conform it shall be replaced with a new side-sewer.New and.existing side- sewers shall be fitted with standard backwater prevention devices. 4. The Developer shall dedicate a 15-foot exclusive easement to the Mt. View Sanitary District centered over the proposed sewer in Weatherly Lane. The easement may be non- exclusive provided that no storm drain or utilities are located within five feet of the sewer main. Structures and trees are not permitted within District easements. 5. The Developer shall submit plans prepared by a California Registered Civil Engineer for review by the District Engineer for the new sanitary sewer mainline extension and laterals. Plans shall conform to the District's Standard Specifications and Ordinances. 6. The Developer shall enter into a sewer improvement agreement with the District,and post security for sanitary sewer improvements, prior to recording the Final Map. 7. The Developer shall pay plan review, mapping and inspection fees, obtain a sewer construction permit, provide a cash Contractor's deposit and construct all improvements necessary for the development of the project at no cost to the District. 8. The Developer shall obtain a sewer connection permit and pay permit fees for trunk sewer,plant capacity and connection prior to connecting each dwelling unit to the MT.VIEW SANITARY DISTRICT District's system. The District will not issue individual connection permits until after the Sanitary Board has accepted mainline improvements for maintenance and building 3800 ARTHUR ROAD foundations have been constructed. P . 0 . B o x 2 7 5 7 MA RTINEZ. CA 94553 ' hD:\Share Station-03\MVSD\Letters\1Ou18 Fietr, Sub 89�t n inners Condit on d& f 1 ' . h11,VIEW 511 I'I i 9. The fees for the review of a previous application for sewer service on this site will be carried forward to this permit application. s 10. Fees shall be charged pursuant to the Ordinance in effect at the time that the permit is ��c�tmb-r�am� .,' issued. Fees are subject to revision by the District Board without notice. Please feel free to contact the undersigned at 925 228 4218 voice, 925 228 4638 fax;or randy.leptien a,lcc-ine.com email, should there be any questions. Very truly yours, ;Dirnict nc. 1ph .Leptien En ineer Encl. Agency Comment Request Form Copy: D. Contreras w/encl. via will call D. Isakson, Isakson &'Assoc. w/o encl. via fax 925 937 7926 RWL/rckl D:\S11ar-. Station-03\MN'SD\Letters\10615 Pletras Sub 8944 =iheers Condl'tloils.dOC . � J Or Mq City of Martinez 52S !-whetta Street, Martii'ieZ,CA 94553.2394 February 7, 2005 Contra Costa Planning Division Attn. hose Marie Pietras 651 Pine St_,0 Floor-North Wing Martinez, CA 94553 Re: Comments on Subdivision#8944.""Weathedy Place" Dear Rose Marie: Thank you for your project referral notice for the proposed Weatherly Place subdivision. Please note that this project is within City of Martinez sphere of influence and also within the City of Martinez sphere of influence and also within the City of Martinez Water District service area. The following are comments on the subject project: 1)Landscaping should be maintained by an entity other than public agency(such as homeowners association ora landscaping and lighting district). Landscaping should also be in accordance with the established character of the area. 2) We recommend that a sound wall be installed at the eastern side of lot 8 to buffer between the new subdivision and Pacheco Blvd. 3) We recommend that coordinated improvements be done to Pacheco Blvd. The developer should be required to match the improvements that have previously been done along Pacheco Blvd. Please contact me if you have any other questions or comments on this project. Sincerely, ,Amber Curl Planning Technician ec:Khalil Yowakim,Associate Fnginea Contra Costa Count,,, 'Fire PraJ��i�bDistrict Fire Chief }''• ' IT Y KEITH RICHTERFebruary 10, 2005 t�T F1%F' Ms. Rosemarie Pietras Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor, North Wing Martinez, CA 94553 Subject. Sub 8944 Weatherly Place, Martinez CCCFPD Project No. 104654 Dear Ms, Pietras: We have reviewed the subdivision application to establish an eight (8) lot residential subdivision at the subject location,. This project is regulated by codes, regulations, and ordinances administered by this Fire District. If approved by;your office, the=following shall be included as conditions of approval: 1. The developer shall provide an adequate and reliable water supply for fire protection with a minimum fire flow of 1000 GPM. Required flow shall be delivered from not more than one (1) hydrant flowing while maintaining 20 pounds residual pressure in the main. (903.3) CFC 2. Provide access roadways with all-weather driving surfaces of not less than 20/16 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. Access roads shall not exceed 16% grade, shall have a minimum outside turning radius of 45/35 feet, and must be capable of supporting.the imposed loads of fire apparatus, i.e., 37122 tons. (902.2) CFC Note: Access roads of 20 feet unobstructed width shall have NO PARKING signs posted or curbs painted red with the words NO PARKING- FIRE LANE clearly marked. Roads 28 feet in width shall have NO PARKING signs posted, allowing for parking on one side only, or curb painted red with the wordsNO PARKING - FIRE LANE clearly marked. Roads 36 feet in width allow for parking on both sides. 200 Goan, Road..•Pieasant Rill.aaliiornis 94523-4694 •TeleDhone(9251 941-3300•-a tB25?94 I-330P Iasi County, •Telephone(926)751-1303 "rax(925)941-3329 West County -Teiepnone- (510)374-7070 wwvv.cccfod.orc - - CCCFPD Project No. 103564 =2- February 10, 2005 3. Access roads shall be installed, in service, and approved prior to construction. (8704.1) CFC 4. Approved premises identification shall be provided. Such numbers shall contrast with their background and be readily visible from the street. (901.4.4) CFC 5. The homes as proposed shall be protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system complying with NFPA 13 D. Submit two(2) sets of plans to this office for review and approval prior to installation. (1003.1) CFC, Contra Costa County General Plan 6. Submit plans to: Contra Costa County Fire Protection District 2010 Geary Road Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 To schedule field inspections and tests, call 925-941 3323. It is requested that a copy of the conditions of approval for the subject project be forwarded'to this office when compiled by the planning agency. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact this office. Sincerely, Ian Hardage Fire Prevention Technician IH/nlr c: Bill Kelleher 906 Harbor View Drive Martinez, CA 94553 Mr. David Isakson Isakson &Associates 2255 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite C Walnut Creek, CA 94598 File: 104564atr C E'QA DETERMINATION `Community Contra -- en M.�a �I�7Unity D�v,6 irestor Development III`- _ p CaS�� i..---, �' � Department � County �� ,FEB Q $ .2006 ---- County Administration Building 651 Pine Street 9E 4th Floor„North Wing S.L' 1 EIR,. COONY L RK COUNTY Martinez, California 94553-0095 ` f o A bEFUTY Phone: (925) 335-1210ca. DATE: February 8, 2006 srq c8vn`� REVISED NOTICE OF PUBLIC REVIEW AND INTENT TO ADOPT A PROPOSED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION County File #RZ053154,#DP053002, and#SD058944 Pursuant to the State of California Public Resources Code and the "Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970”as amended to date,this is to advise you that the Community Development Department of Contra Costa County has prepared an initial study on the following project: DAVID O,ISAKSON(Applicant)—WILLIAM KELLECHER(Owner) The project consists of the following related applications: A. Counly,File#RZ053154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple Residential—M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District—P-1 Zoning District with a variance to the five acre minimum. B, County'File#DP053002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences(1787 and 1871 square feet)on 1.10 acres of property. C. County,File#SD058944: The applicant requests approval to subdivide 1.10 acres into eight single- family lots ranging in size from 5000 to 7687 square feet. The subject property's address is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez area (M=12) (ZA: G-13) (CT: 3200.02)(Parcel#161-270-011) The proposed development will not result in any significant impacts. A copy of the mitigated negative declaration and all documents referenced in the negative declaration may be reviewed in the offices of the Community Development Department,and Application and Permit Center at the McBrien Administration Building, North Wing, Second Floor, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, during normal business hours. Public Comment Period - The period for accepting comments on the adequacy of the environmental documents extends to 5:00 P.M., February 28,2006. Any,comments should be in writing and submitted to the following address: Name: Rose Marie Pietras Community Development Department Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street,North Wing, 2nd Floor Martinez,CA 94553 Office Hours Monday- Friday:8:00 a.m.- 5:00 p.m. Office is closed the 1 st, 3rd & 5th Fridays of each month It is anticipated that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration will be considered for adoption-at a meeting of the Zoning Administrator on March 6, 2006. The .hearing is anticipated to be held at the McBrien Administration Building, Room 107, Pine and:,Escobar Streets, Martinez. It is expected that the Zoning Administrator,will also conduct a hearing on the application at that same meeting. Rose Marie Pietras Senior Planner cc: County Clerk's Office (2 copies) Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: RZ053154,DP053002 &SD058944 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Contra Costa County Community Development Department 651 Pine Street,North Wing-4th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Rose Marie Pietras, Senior Planner (925)335-1216 4. Project Location: Pacheco Boulevard Martinez 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address David O.Isakson 2255 Ygnacio Valley Road Walnut:Creek,CA 94598 6. General Plan Designation: Multiple Family Residential-Low 7. Zoning: M-12 8. Description of Project: The applicant requests approval to subdivide a 1.10-acre site into 8 single-family residential lots. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: The subject site comprises 1:10 acres located at 4776 Pacheco Boulevard. The site has a conventional wood- frame house along the top of the slope at the southwestern end of the property,and this house will remain. Below the existing house are some narrow terraces with a few old fruit trees. The boundaries of the subject site consist of a vacant lot to the north that was previously subdivided into 20 residential home sites presently being graded for development. The property to the south is also vacant. The area is in transition with single family housing being developed. 10. Other public agencies whose approval (e.g.,permits, financing are found. approval, or participation agreement): ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning _ Transportation/ _ Public Services Population&Housing Circulation _ Utilities& Service X Geological Problems _ Biological Resources Systems Water _ Energy&Mineral _ Aesthetics — Air Quality Resources _ Cultural Resources Mandatory Findings of _ Hazards _ Recreation Significance X Noise _ No Significant Impacts Identified 2 - DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. X 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 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I 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 the 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. I find that although the pr9posed'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. Signature Date Pi Is CCC Commurifty Development Department Printed Name :For SOURCES In the process of preparing the Checklist and conducting the evaluation,the following references(which are available for review at the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651.Pine Street 5th Floor-North Wing,Martinez)were consulted: 1. Contra Costa Resource Mapping System—Clayton Quad Sheet Panels. 2. (Reconsolidated)County General Plan(July 1996)and EIR on the General Plan(January 1991). 3. General Plan and Zoning Maps. 4. Contra Costa County Code;including zoning and subdivision ordinances and the State Planning and Zoning Law, Subdivision Map Act and California Environmental Quality Act. 5. Agency Comments 6. Field Review 7. Preliminary Geotechnical Report prepared by Diablo Engineers,Inc. dated January 28,2005. 8. Geological Peer Review prepared by Darwin Myers Associates dated February 11,2005 and October 17, 2005. 9. Environmental Noise Assessment prepared by Illingworth&Rodkin, Inc. dated June 1, 2005. n , 3 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: 1. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a _ X scenic vista? Sources 1, 2, 3 &6 J b. Substantially damage scenic resources, _ _ _ X including,but not limited to, trees,rock outcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Sources 1, 2, 3 &6 C. Substantially degrade the existing _ _a X visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Sources 1, 2, 3 &6 d. Create a new source of substantial light _ _ _ X or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Source 1, 2, 3 &6 SUMMARY: No impact. a) The site is along Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez area. The property is not in a scenic vista area. The site has a single family residence on the western portion of the property. Staff made a field visit on October 25,2005. As stated above there is one single family residence with the remaining property vacant. b) The site is not located near a scenic highway. c) The visual character of the site would change if the eventual construction of the proposed homes took place. The proposed 8-lot subdivision is in an urbanized area designated Multiple Family Residential — Low in the County General Plan. The appearance would improve the property. The proposed project would be consistent with the surrounding neighborhood that is transitioning into a denser area consisting of single family residences. d) No glare would be introduced in the area. New sources of light would illuminate from the proposed home and shall be screened from the required landscaping and tree planting. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES: In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agricultural and farmland. Would the project: 4 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique _ _ X Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? Sources 1, 2, 3 &6 b. Conflict with existing zoning for _ _ X agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? Sources 1,2, 3 & 6 C. Involve other changes in the existing — _ X environment which, due to their location or nature,could result in conversion of Farmland,to non-agricultural use? Sources 1,2, 3 &6 SUMMARY: No impact a, b &c) The site is located in an area designated urbanized land on the Contra Costa County Important Farmland 2000 Map. The property is designated Multiple Family Residential–Low. This proposal will provide for additional housing fulfilling the goals and policies of the County General Plan,Housing Element. U. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation _ _ _ X of the applicable air quality plan? Sources 1, 2, 3, &6 b. Violate any air quality standard or _ _ X contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? Sources 1,2, 3 &6 C. Result in a cumulatively considerable _ _ _ X net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Source 1,2, 3 &6 5 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Fact d. Expose sensitive.receptors to substantial _ X pollutant concentrations? Source 1,2, 3 &6 e. Create objectionable odors affecting a _ _ X substantial number of people? Source 1,2, 3 &6 SUMMARY: Less than significant impact. a) The proposal does not conflict with implementation of an applicable air quality plan. b) The proposal would not violate air quality standards or contribute to existing air quality violations. c) The region is currently in non-attainment for ozone and fine particulate matter (PM10). Implementation of the project would lead to a slight.increase in ozone and-ozone precursors,as they are primarily the result of the automobile emissions and development of the additional residences would lead to increased automobile use. The residential use is not an inherent producer of PM10 pollution. Construction activities could cause a temporary increase in ambient levels of PM10. There could be an impact from dust and fine particulates commonly associated with earth movement and construction. The project will be conditioned to require that measures be taken to reduce PM10 emissions during earth movement and construction. These conditions will include,but may not be limited to,watering the site multiple times daily,sweeping and collecting loose particles on-site and requiringthat dump trucks be covered when hauling loose materials. The Building Inspection Department, Grading Division, will also enforce measures to reduce particulate pollution. d) No sensitive receptors are located near the site. e) Subdividing the site and construction of new residences would produce no objectionable odors. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either _ _ X directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans,polices, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Sources 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any _ _ X riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional 6 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation lmpact I=Kt plans,policies,regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Sources 1, 2, 3 5-&6 C. Have a substantial adverse effect on _ _ _ X federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including,but not limited to,marsh,vernal pool, coastal, etc.)through direct removal, filling,hydrological interruption, or other means? Sources 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 d. Interfere substantially with the movement _ _ _ X of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident.or.migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Sources 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 e. Conflict with any local policies or _ _ _ X ordinances protecting biological resources, -such as tree preservation policy or ordinance? Sources 1,2, 3, 5 &6 f. Conflict with the provisions of an _ _ - X adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local,regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Sources 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 SUMMARY: No Impacts. a) The property is located in along Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez area. b) The California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG) correspondence dated May 7, 2003 has determined that the biological assessment adequately characterizes the biological resources of the site and identifies appropriate actions to address potential impacts. CDFG requests the opportunity to review the plant survey and follow-up results of California red-legged frog,whipsnake and burrowing owl surveys. c) Wetlands associated with the artificial reservoir were determined no to fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S.Army Corp of Engineers(USACE)orthe CDFG;wetland do fall under the authority of the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board(RWQCB). No impacts to wetlands would occur as a result of project implementation; no notification to the RWQCB is warranted regarding wetlands impacts. d) The proposed project would not interfere with the migration of native fish or wildlife. The project site is comparatively small and is surrounded by urban development. The property does not represent a 7 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incomoration Imuact Fact significant wildlife corridor. The proposed development would not significantly impact wildlife movement in the region. e) The proposal does not conflict with policies or ordinances protecting biological resources and protected trees. Existing trees will be incorporated into the development. f) The County does not have an approved Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Conservation Plan. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the _ _ X significance of a historical resource.as defined in 315064.5? Source 1,2, 3,5 &6 b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the _ _ _ X significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to 315064.5? Source 1, 2, 3,:5 &6 C. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique _ _ _ X paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 d. Disturb any human remains, including _ _ — X those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 SUMMARY: No Impact a-b) A copy of this application was forwarded to the California Historic Resources Information System (CHRIS) for comments. CHRIS stated that the site has a low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). Therefore,no further study for archaeological resources is recommended. The proposed project area does not contain historical resources c) No unique paleontological resources or unique geological feature exist on the site. d) No human remains exist on the site. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the proj ect? a. Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map 8 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Fact Impact issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. — _ _ X Source 1, 2, 3 &7 2. Strong seismic ground shaking? _ _ X _ 3. Seismic-related ground failure, including _ _ _ X liquefaction? Source 1,2, 3 &7 4.Landslides? Source 1, 2, 3 &7 _ X b. Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss _ X of topsoil? Source 1,2, 3 &7 C. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is _ X = _ unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide,lateral spreading, subsidence,liquefaction or collapse? Source 1, 2, 3 & 7 d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in — X Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Source 1, 2, 3 &7 e. Have soils incapable of adequately _ _ _ X supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Source 1, 2, 3 &7 SUMMARY: :Potentially significant unless mitigated. a. 1. The nearest fault considered active by the California Division of Mines&Geology is the Concord fault. The Concord fault A-P zone passes approximately l mile northeast of the site. a. 2. According to the Safety Element (p.10-13) the site is in an area rated "lowest damage susceptibility: The risk of structural damage from ground shaking is regulated by the building codes and County Grading Ordinance. The UBC requires use of seismic parameters which allow the structural engineering analysis for buildings based on soil profile types (see UBC, 1997, Volume 2,Div. 5,page 2-23). Compliance with building and grading regulations can be expected to:keep risks within generally accepted limits. a. 3. According to the Safety Element(p. 10-15),the site is rated"generally low"liquefaction potential. This preliminary finding is supported by the subsurface data presented in the geotechnical reports submitted with this application. a. 4. A. With regard to landslides,slides are shown on published maps,and the Soil Survey of Contra Costa County(1977)indicates that the erosion hazard is high. The preliminary finding of the C� Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Cal Engineering & Geology report.(dated September 12, 2005) is the site is suitable for residential use, provided the Corrective Grading Plan .is;implemented. 'Final review of grading, drainage and foundation plans is needed prior to issuance of construction permits. b. A SWPP and Erosion Control Plan are a routine requirement'of projects requiring grading permits. The SWPP identifies the"Erosion Control Plan",which is required for the grading permit,provides the details of the erosion control measures to be applied on the site and maintained throughout the winter:rainy season. c. The County Geologist review of the existing geologic data indicates that the project is feasible. If the site is a dormant,deep-seated bedrock landslide which extends upslope from the project site. During corrective grading, the slide may be very sensitive to grading. The geotechnical report provides standards and criteria for site grading, drainage and foundation design. d. Expansive soils shrink and swell as a result of moisture changes that can cause heaving and cracking of slabs-on-grade,pavements and structures founded on shallow foundations.`Building damage due to volume changes associates with expansive soils can be reduced by placing slabs on select, granular fill,and by of rigid mat or port tensioned slabs. General foundation design criteria are provided by the Cal Engineering&Geology report. It should be recognized that expansive soils are an engineering issue, and.not a land use or feasibility issue. e. The project is expected to be served by public sewers. Environmental Analysis 1. Landslide and Corrective Gradine Impact: The site is an upland property that is within the outcrop belt of mudstone and shale formation of Early Tertiary age. Based on reconnaissance level data(chiefly geologic interpretation of vertical angle aerial photographs), the U.S. Geological Survey (Nielsen, 1915) concluded that the entire property is ' within a massive(bedrock?)landslide. The USGS (Ellen and Wentworth, 1995)concludes that the soil mantle and bedrock are expansive and possess adverse engineering characteristic. The mapping of the California Geological Survey(Haydon, 1995)considers the site to be within a slide area within the outcrop belt of the Tdeganos Formation. According to the CGS report, slope stability of this unit is judged to be moderate_to poor and surficial soil is poor. Slide planes can occur in deeper,less weathered,less fractured rock. The CGS report indicates that the formation occurring on the site is rated highest landslide susceptibility, and the CGS report recommends detailed, comprehensive geologic and geotechnical analysis for all land development projects in lands classified highest damage susceptibility;a conservative approach to grading is needed if long-term stability is to be achieved. Based on slope stability analysis,Cal Engineering&Geology concludes that the project is feasible. Figure 4 of their report provides a geologic cross-section;Figure 5 presents a corrective grading plan;and Figure 6 presents R emedial Grading Sections&Details. The Cal Engineering&Geology report indicates that the remediation plan will yield adequate safety factors. Cal Engineering&Geology also recommends that they be provided the opportunity to review plans prior to issuance of construction permits to ensure 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact consistency with the intent of geotechnical recommendations;and that the geotechnical engineer observe grading and perform testing to provide documentation of the as-built condition;and to make supplemental recommendations of exposed conditions require changes to the approved grading plans. The peer review geologist of the County considers the geologic and geotechnical data sufficient to define the landslide and grading,impacts and to identify detailed mitigation measures. Miti ag tion:Measures A. All grading and drainage plans are subject to review of the County Geologist and the review and approval of the Zoning Administrator. The plans shall be prepared:by,appropriately licensed prc fessionals. B. Unstable soils and landslides shall be removed within graded areas. Buttressing, keying and installation of debris benches shall be provided in the transition areas between open space areas. C. During grading, the project engineering geologist shall observe and approve all keying excavations, removal offill and landslide materials down to stable bedrock or in-place material, and installation of all subdrains including their connections. All fill slope construction shall be observed and tested by the project geotechnical engineer, and the density•test results and reports submitted to the County to kept on file. Cut slopes and keyways shall be periodically observed and mapped by the project geotechnical and civil engineers who will provide any required slope modification recommendations based on the actual geologic conditions encountered during grading. Written approval from the Contra Costa County BID shall be obtained prior to any modification. D. A grading completion report shall be submitted to BID by the project_geotechnical engineers. These reports shall include the results and locations of all compaction tests, as-built plans of all landslide repairs and fill removal including geologic mapping of the exposed geology of all excavation showing cut cross-sections and sub-drain depths andJocations. The lists of excavations approved by the engineering geologist shall also be submitted. Building permits shall not be issued without documentation that the grading and other pertinent work has been pei formed in accordance with the geotechnical report criteria and applicable Grading Ordinance provisions. E. The recommendations for site grading contained in the approved geotechnical reports shall be followed during grading unless modifications are specifically approved in writing by the Building Inspection Department. F. Grading, improvement erosion control and building plans shall employ as appropriate the following surface drainage measures in construction:asphalt or concrete-lined swales to carry runoff;fill slopes in excess of 10 feet high shall be graded.to 2.5:I.(horizontal to vertical) or flatter;positive grading of building pads for removal of surface water from foundation areas; individual pad drainage;collection of downspout water from roofgutters;avoidance ofsprinkler systems(as opposed to drip irrigation systems) in the vicinityoffoundations;grading ofslopes to eliminate over-the-bank runoff, and re-vegetation of permanent slopes. Interim protective 1.1 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact measures for runoff shall be followed during the construction phases when slopes are most susceptible to erosion. The final design shall incorporate subsurface drainage measures, including the installation ofsubsurface drains within major new fills and landslide repair areas. G. Concurrently with recordation of the Parcel Map, record statement to run with deeds to the property acknowledging the Geotechnical Study Eby title, (firm), and date,Icalling attention to conclusions, including the long-term maintenance requirements, and noting that the report is available to prospective buyers from seller of the parcel. 3. Exnansive and Corrosive Soils Impact: The potential building sites and roadways are underlain by highly expansive soils that are subject to soil creep and some soils in the vicinity are corrosive. The,Cal Engineering & Geology report has provided recommendations for foundations;but further evaluation of foundations is warranted to address differential fill thickness, total and differential settlement within building°pads, and.measures to control moisture around foundations prior to issuance of building permits. Mitigation Measure A. Prior to issuance of building permits chemical testing or representative building pad soils shall be submitted to determine the level of corrosionprotection required for steel and concrete materials used for construction. The following measures shall be implemented where appropriate to protect against corrosion: use of sulfate-resistant concrete and use of protective linings to encase steel piping buried in native soils. B. The geotechnical engineer shall a)review and approve grading,drainage and foundation plans prior to issuance of construction permits to verb that the plans incorporate the geotechnical recommendations aimed at minimizing expansive soil effects and f ll settlement on structures;and b) observe construction to assure compliance with recommendations in the approved geotechnical report. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL: Would the project: - a. Create a significant hazard to the public _ _ _ X or the environment through the routine transport,use, or disposal of hazardous materials? 'Sources 1,2, 3, 5 &6 b. Create a significant hazard to the public _ _ _ X or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 C. Emit hazardous emissions or handle _ _ _ X hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, 12 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation. Impact Impact substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 d. Be located on a site which is included on a _ _ X list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65862.5 and, as.a result, would it create.a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 e. For a project located within an airport land _ _ _ X use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a:public airport or public use airport,'would the project result in a safety hazard;for people residing or working.in the project area. Source 1, 2,3,5 &6 f. For a project within the vicinity of a private _ _ X airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? Source 1,2, 3,5 &6 g. Impair implementation of or physically _ _ _ X interfere with an adopted emergency response planor emergency evacuation plan? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 h. Expose people or structures to a significant _ _ X risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Source 1,2, 3, 5 &6 SUMMARY: :No Impact d) In compliance with Government Code Section' 65962.5 the California Department of Toxic Substances Control issued a list of hazardous waste and substances sites (Cortese List). The 2002 edition of the Cortese List no hazardous sites within the property or in close proximity. e-f) The project site is not within the vicinity of a public use airport or private airstrip. g) Implementation of the project would not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. h) The site is located in an urban area with the following uses in the surrounding area: single family residences to the north, and RV storage to the south, and a mixture of uses consisting of a church, single:family residences and a plumbing company to the east. The property is not intermixed with wildlands. 13 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Fact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a. Violate any water quality standards or _ _ X waste discharge requirements? Source 1, 2, 3 &5 b. Substantially deplete groundwater supplies _ _ X or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Sourcel,2, 3 &5 C. Substantially alter the existing drainage _ _ X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off--site? Source 1,.2, 3.&5 d. Substantially alter the existing drainage - _ _ X pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site? Source 1, 2, 3 &5 e. Create or contribute runoff water which _ _ _ X would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Sources 1, 2, 3 &5 f. Otherwise substantially degrade water _ _ _ X quality? Sourcesl,2, 3 &5 g. Place housing within a 100-year flood _ _ _ X hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? Sources 1, 2, 3 &5 h. Place within a 100-year flood hazard area _ _ _ X structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? Sources 1, 2, 3 &5 14 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Ittmact Incorporation Fact Impact i. Expose people or structures to a significant _ _ _ X risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Sources 1, 2, 3 & 5 j. Inundation by seiche,tsunami, or mudflow? _ _ — X Sources 1,2,3 &5 SUMMARY: No Impact a) The new residences would produce a minimal amount of polluted runoff due to leaks of automobiles, use of backyards pesticides,etc. This pollution would be negligible. b) No water will be extracted from an underground aquifer. c-d-e) Division 914 of the County Ordinance Code requires all-storm water entering and/or originating on this property to be collected and conveyed without diversion and within an adequate storm drain system, to an adequate natural watercourse°having a definable bed and banks, or to an existing adequate public storm drainage system which coveys the storm waters to an adequate natural watercourse. The applicant shall verify the adequacy of any downstream drainage facility accepting storm water from the project prior to discharging runoff. The property is located within Drainage 57, which:is known to have inadequate drainage facilities,particularly those downstream of the proposed subdivision. If the downstream system(s)is/are not adequate to handle the existing plus project condition for the required design storm,improvements shall be constructed to make the system adequate. Improvements shall be consistent with the adopted Drainage 57 storm drain plan. The applicant is encouraged to work with other developments in the area to coordinate drainage infrastructure improvements. This project is subject to the County Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (Ordinance 2005-1). As part of these requirements,the applicant shall,incorporate Best Management Practices(BMP's)to the maximum extent practicable into the design of this project,and provide for perpetual operation and maintenance for all treatment BMP's. The applicant is granted an exception to Provision"C.3"of the County Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance because the proposed project will not create or replace at least one acre of impervious surface. However,this project:is still subject to all other provisions of the County Stormwater Management and Discharge Control with Provision"C.3"may be required for any future development application on the subject parcel. The site generally slopes downward towards the east. The applicant is proposing the runoff to drain to the existing 36" storm drain running along the south side of Pacheco Boulevard per Flood Control approval. The rate and amount of runoff from the site will be improved with the new drainage plan that the applicant is proposing and been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. 15 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact The applicant is subject to all the rules,regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit for municipal, construction and industrial activities as promulgated by the California State Water Resources Control Board or any of its Regional Water Quality Control Boards(San Francisco Bay—Regional III). g-h) No portion of the site lies within a FEMA designated Flood Zone. The site is within Flood Zone C— of minimal flooding,Panel#280. i) No levees or dams protect the site. j) Seiche and tsunami do not occur in this area. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a. Physically divide an established community?_ _ _ X Sources 1, 2, 3 &4 b. Conflict with any applicable land use plan, _ _ _ X policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project(including ,but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Sources 1, 2, 3 &4 C. Conflict with any applicable habitat _ _ _ X conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Sources 1, 2, 3 &4 SUMMARY: No Impact a) The proposed project would not physically divide an established community. b) The property is designated Multiple Family Residential—Low in County General Plan and zoned M-12 zoning district. c) There i.s no habitat conservation plan or natural community plan in this area of Contra Costa County. X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a. Result in the loss of availability of a known _ _ _ X mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? Source 1, 2&3 16 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation [mnact Impact b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally _ _ _ X important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Source 1,2 &3 SUMMARY: No Impact a-b) No mineral resources were identified at the site. XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a. Exposure of persons to or generation of _ X noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Sources 1, 2 b. Exposure of persons to or generation of _ X _ excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Source 1, 2 & C. A substantial permanent increase in _ _ X _ ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Source 1,2 d. A substantial temporary or periodic increase _ _ X in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Source 1,2 e. For a.project located within an airport land _ X use plan or,where such a plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Source 1, 2 f. For a project within the vicinity of a private _ _ _ X airstrip,would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Source 1, 2 SUMMARY: Impact with mitigation measures. a-c) The applicant submitted an Environmental Noise Assessment dated June 1, 2005. The assessment presents the noise and land use compatibility criteria developed by Contra Costa County,the results of existing noise monitoring on the site, and the evaluation of mitigation measures required to achieve compatibility with the Contra Costa County criteria. T 7 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Contra Costa Noise Element Guidelines: The Noise Element of the Contra Costa County General Plan presents goals and policies for the development of noise sensitive land uses in the County. The applicable noise policies are Policies 11-2 and 11-4. Policy 11-2 of the Noise Element states that the standard for outdoor noise levels in residential areas is an Ldn of 60dB. However,amLdn of.600 or less may not be achievable in all residential areas due to economic or aesthetic constraints. Policy 11- 4 states that Title 24;Part 2,of the California Code of Regulations requires that new multiple family housing;projects,hotels and motels exposed to an Ldn.of 60dB or greater have a:detailed acoustical analysis; describing how the project will provide an interior Ldn of 45dB or less. The County shall also require new single.-family housing projects to provide for interior Ldn of 45 or less. The County -shall also require new single-family housing for an interior Ldn of 45dB of less. The County normally desires to,.achieve outdoor.noise levels in residential.areas not in excess of,an Ldn of 60 dB and interior noise levels not in excess of an Ldn of 45 dB. Existing Noise Environment:.The prof ect=site is currently affected by noise generated along Pacheco Boulevard as well as Interstate 680 and potentially the Atchison, Topeka & Santa:FeRailroad. A long-term noise measurement(LT-1)and two concurrent short-term measurements were conducted on Thursday,May 12,2005. The location of these noise measurements is contained in Attachment 1 of the submitted report. In addition,Attachment of the report shows the noise levels at LT-1 collected during a 24-hour period. This measurement location is representative of the noise exposure ofthe lot closest to Pacheco.Boulevard. Daytime hourly average noise levels typically range from 65 to 70 dBA. The Ldn at the long-term measurement location was 73dBA during weekends. The noise levels for the two short-term measurements with the concurrent'long-term interval are shown in Table 3 of the report. The project site is about 1300 feet from the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railroad, which is well beyond.the 650 foot 60Ldn noise contour reported in the Contra Costa County General Plan. The Ldn noise level resulting from the train at the project site is too low to affect the Ldn generated by the other major noise sources. }Future Noise Environment: Future traffic volumes were unavailable from the County. Traffic volumes on Pacheco Boulevard just south of Arnold Drive from 1998and 2003 were available. Over that five year period,traffic volumes increased by 12%. At that rate of growth,future noise levels are projected to increase by about 1 dBA on Pacheco Boulevard over the next ten to fifteen years. The project Ldn at the measurement location would be 74 dBA in the future. d) There would be a temporary increase in noise levels if the applicant decides to demolish or remodel the existing residences. These impacts are considered less than significant due to their short duration. The project would be conditioned to require that steps be taken to reduce construction noise such as fitting engines with mufflers, limiting the hours of construction and transport of materials and machinery and locating noise producing equipment as far from residences as possible. e-f) The site is not in the vicinity of a public use airport or private airstrip and is not contained in an airport land use plan. 18 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact Exterior Noise Projection Impact: The exterior Ldn noise levels at lots 7 and 8 will exceed the 60 dBA Ldn noise standard. Mitigation Measure:. 1. -Constructing a noise.barrier for these two lots would significantly reduce the exterior noise levels •at both lots. With the noise barrier as and where specified, the noise level at lot 7 would satisfy thee.60dBA Ldn exterior noise standard, but the exterior Ldn noise level at lot 8 would be and continue to exceed 60dBA. To achieve this, the noise barrier would need to be at least 7 feet tall, be constructed airtight at its face and base and have a surface density of at least 3 pounds per square foot. The barrier would be built between lot 8 and Pacheco Boulevard;:along the southern edge of lot 7 and 8 and for a short distance-between lot 7 and 8 in the backyard areas. For a schematic of where the noise barrier should be constructed,see figure 1 in the report. The exterior Ldn noise levels at lots 1 through.6 would not exceed the 60dBA Ldn standard;therefore ,mitigation for,these lots would not be necessary. Interior Noise Projection Impact:.The.exterior noise environment near Pacheco Boulevard is dominated by noise generated along Pacheco Boulevard,while the exterior noise environment further from Pacheco Boulevard will be dominated by Interstate 680 noise. The ten-minute Leq at ST-2 was 57:dBA. Based on the daily trend from the long term noise measurement, the projected Ldn at.ST-2 is about 58 dBA. Typically, interior noise levels in residential units with windows partially open are 15 decibels lower than exterior noise levels, and interior noise levels are roughly 25 dBA lower with windows closed. This is assuming typical California construction methods. Mitigation Measure 1. Where exterior noise levels range between 60 and 70 dBA Ldn, interior noise levels can typically be maintained below County standards(45 dBA Ld), with incorporation of an adequate forced air- mechanical ventilation systems in the.residential-units to allow residents the option of controlling noise by maintaining the windows closed. At dot 8,the noise exposure of the fagade facing.Pacheco Boulevard is projected to:be 70dBA Ldn. Sound rated window, door and wall elements are likely required to achieve the 45 dBA Ldn interior noise limit. A detailed analysis of the house plan by a qualified acoustical specialist should be completed during the design phase. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project:, a. Induce substantial population growth in.an _ _ _ X area, either directly(for example,by proposing new homes and businesses)or indirectly(for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Source 1, 2 &3 - 19 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation ImRact Fact b. Displace substantial numbers of existing - _ _ X housing,necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Source l, 2&3 C. Displace substantial numbers of people — — _ X necessitating-the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Source 1, 2 &3 SUMMARY: No impact. a-c) On average,2.5 people reside in one residence. The proposal is for eight single-family units totaling 20.0 persons. The County General Plan has designated this area as Multiple Family —Low. The property is located in an urban area of the County. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES: a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities,need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services. Source 5: 1. Fire Protection? _ _ X 2. Police Protection? — _ _ X 3. Schools? _ _ _ X 4. Parks? _ _ X 5. Other Public facilities? X SUMMARY: No impact a) 1. The Contra Costa County Fire Protection District currently serves the site. The increase in demand for fire protection services would be.mitigated by the increased tax assessment of the property. New facilities would be constructed according to community need. 2. The site is currently served by the Contra Costa County Sheriff s Department. The applicant shall participate in an election process. The.increase in demand for police services would be mitigated by an increase annual tax assessment per parcel of the property. New facilities would be constructed according to community need. 3. The site is served by the Martinez Unified School District. The District had no comments on the proposal. The increase in demand for school services would be mitigated by the collection of 20 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incomoration ImiaCt Impact school district fees at the time building permits were issued for the new residences and by the increased tax assessment of the property. No facilities would be constructed according to community need. 4. No new facilities would be required as a direct result of this subdivision. New facilities would be constructed according to community need(see"Recreation"below):. 5. No other facilities would be affected by the proposal. XIV. RECREATION: la. Would the project increasethe use of _ _ _ X existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Source 1, 2 &3 b. Does the project include recreational _ _ X facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities-which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Source 1, 2 &3 SUMMARY: No Impact a) The proposal would not result in an increase in demand for parks and recreational facilities. b) There is no proposal to expand existing facilities. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a. Cause an increase in traffic which is _ _ _ X substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips,the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Source 1, 2, 3, b. Exceed;either individually or cumulatively, _ _ _ X a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 . 21 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact C. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, _ _ _ X including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results,-in substantial safety risks? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 d. Substantially increase hazards due to a _ _ _ X design feature(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections)or incompatible uses(e.g., farm equipment)? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 & e. Result in inadequate emergency access? _ _ _ X Source-1, 2,3,:5 &6 f. Result in inadequate parking capacity? _ _ _ X Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 g. Conflict with adopted policies,plans, or _ _ _ X i programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g.,bus turnouts,bicycle racks)? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 & 6 SUMMARY: No Impact a-b) The property fronts on Pacheco Boulevard,which has a current pavement width of 34 feet within a 60- foot right of way and a planned ultimate pavement width of 64 feet within an 84-foot right of way per the Pacheco Boulevard Precise Alignment (PA 3951-68) on the file. with the Public Works Department. The applicant shall dedicate the necessary right of way to provide for the ultimate width of 84 feet and construct frontage improvements (i.e., curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscape strip, and necessary pavement widening)along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard,similar to those required for Tract 7418. The applicant shall construct a 20-foot radius concrete curb return at the.southwest comer of the intersection of the proposed private road and Pacheco Boulevard as well as a curb ramp in accordance with current County standards. The applicant proposes to construct a combined access road with a 50-foot right of way to serve this project.,the adjacent proj ect to the north(Tract 7418),and the adjacent property to the southwest. The applicant shall construct an on-site roadway system that meets current County private road standards with a:minimum traveled way width of 28 feet within a 50-foot access easement, as shown on the Revised Tentative Map. The minimum width of the proposed sidewalk along the private road shall be five feet(width measured from curb face) and shall widen to 6.5 feet along the frontage of Pacheco Boulevard. The applicant shall construct a paved tumaround in accordance with County private road standards at the end of the proposed private road,subject to the review of the Fire District,if sufficient emergency vehicle access is not already in place as-part of Tract 7418 (i.e., Kingswood Lane and Rancihita Lane). An easement shall be recorded over the proposed private road granting legal access to the adjacent property owner(s)of Tract 7418 to-the north. In turn,legal rights to access the subject property from Pacheco Boulevard must also be verified. To limit direct driveway access to Pacheco Boulevard,abutter's rights of access shall be relinquished along the frontage Pacheco Boulevard, with the exception of the proposed private road intersection. 22 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incomoration Impact lmoact c) Air traffic patterns would not be affected. d) No hazardous design features or incompatible uses are proposed. e) The Fire District raised no concerns regarding emergency access. f) The site plan shows the internal road. In addition each home shall have an attached two-car garage. Guest parking shall be accommodated on each lot. g) The proposal does not conflict with adopted policies or programs supporting alternative transportation. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a. Exceed wastewater treatment requirements _ _ . X of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 b. Require or result in the construction of new _ _ _ X water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansionof existing facilities,the construction or which could cause significant environmental.effects? Source 1,2, 3, 5 &6 C. Require or result in the construction of new _ _ _ X storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities,the construction of which could cause.significant environmental•effects? Source 1,2,:3;5 &6 d. Have sufficient water supplies available to _ _ _ X serve the project from existing entitlement and resources, or are new or expanded entitlement needed?-Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 e. Result in a determination by the wastewater _ _ X treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Source 1, 2, 3, 5 &6 f Be served by a landfill with sufficient _ _ _ X permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Source 1,2, 3, 5 & 6 g. Comply with federal, state and local statutes _ _ _ X and regulations related to solid waste? Source 1,2, 3, 5 &6 23 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Fact SUMMARY: No Impact. a) The applicant must comply with-the County's Storm Water Management and.Discharge Control Ordinance and all rules,regulations and procedures of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. b) The Contra Costa Water District would provide water service. Mt. View would provide wastewater service. Adequate supplies exist to serve the project without requiring the expansion of new facilities. c) See Section VIII(c) for response. d) The Contra Costa Water District will provide water service.. Adequate supplies exist to serve the project without requiring construction of new facilities. e) The Mt.View Sanitation District will provide sanitary service. Sufficient wastewater capacity exists without requiring construction of new facilities. f) The project would be served by a landfill facility within Contra Costa County. County landfills have capacity to serve a project of this size. g) Refuse collection from the new residences would be deposited in a landfill that must comply with state and local regulations for disposal of solid waste. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a. Does the project have the potential to _ _ X degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish and 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 prehistory? b. Does the project have impacts that are indiv- _ _ X idually 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)? C. Does the project have environmental effects_ _ _ X which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 24 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporation Impact Impact SUMMARY: No Impact a-c) The proposed subdivision with the mitigation measures described above will not.have a significant impact on the environment, •nor will the project,have significant :cumulative impact on the environment. This is an infill project in an urban area of the central county. The County General Plan's designation is Multiple Family—Low. The proposed 8 single-family lots are consistent with the General Plan's designated use. GACurrent Planning\curr-plan\Env Review\1nitial'StudiesW058944 initialstudy.doc P� � o 0 © w r v 0 o � U a � ri ii � s sg AM, c G c . v F''.�° 4,� C7 U C7 oo C�' a� c Aa�i. O p, O � � Y t Y � } co �, Q 5 cn Q v) C7 cn U Cl vo U m � y zs q y�rmy O O O U m U ea U ca U M II f 0 0 0 0 O ca O ca O ca O ca G m �c a0i L. p p .� p .� O N U a 4 Q A. C P. C A. .. C R. 8 ' U Q U Q U Q U Q U a c{, cd y •C ti vi O r U ._. cd O y y C Wcl a > a0.i ° ci o e°o'� 3 c a Y v 3 0 .j S °d b ° oro o_ �' S�� � w � v a •5, a� � c ° v, � v > " � `�° a � •° � c c � "' G v ,.. :d o •o � °°-c � ��:: Y nN1 co >' Cd cd c c '�. O 6) -a p 'O •bq 4; U C U ca N c c`" ° 3 ° w y ced .c c)01 o ,�/ i¢ 'C o'• d .ai ai c Uia y aci U "D '> •C ° p 'CC y O On. c a0.i Q G. C °' �•°-' > eo s •`�' 'D O O '° «i ` A. C bU0 U v Wglr� n0 CLv pa o o v N c b w c �, °„ n c c o II d Z "b cd o ° c ani o c .5 It o «. c = c. a�- a� E x C] ca c o o Y 7 a� c o 0 0 ° n •°; U °�' °' U o `cd cz x c m ai..x cd '53d O .G U �, " •ca c a� .O y G E G. O n._ c« a ° yc of1 cU ULd �p Ld O�-0 o bo w En o 0 0 cd a ° . c Ut o ca ti a m v> A c Q a a i~ u� tea' II I� H. 2i w rz a ys,wiz Ml f, vs u� A fr4 ° A :y s a to � s O P OU a. 0 `' fYl ctl `3 t� �`�3 A � V t.•' d�.. O 9� 5bph a) 0. _ p O � cnp C a� b0 "; N Cs oia oia > U y }., M ' •.«;' v�b "a 0 cy�.. i,—ps s= 4="acao N � � [> tb0o a 9 8 S v0C � o.o oniaaS ow � o � :.. u = op ° � c � c � ., � A - "IMP a0i ai oo c = via c :° •� v c°, °' _ O ° vcl Cd y > c ° u e G O. =O cd ° LS. y �F •� v.a w: •+.. 'p ,� 7 = Rf U 'O rn rQ 'rn G ...� .0 .r•cis ca iy M A N .V.� 0 y,. o c > °' x O $ is o ° n a o 3 � �, ai = c N fl y c w U v p E Ca s o E y en _ > �° :m °; oq.. y > a o a o n. e3i II ° m v y o 3 °° c = L ea .°2 is d 0. b . = A m e °' b .° ° g to ° 3 ° �pp y se o f a� y o on o a x§ '3 o a c y C7 o a°� _ •" c a. u u w o ��,,��`� ? s vc 'W CID � ==4 p, c`a � �a. c� ti o ` � •�_^. o .5 �coi � a a � � Wiz°' " i '� � 3 a a� � � a� ;.o .° � a; •� � w. ' 0 0 0 >,�, o � ^ a � C7 E a o a o to oo oai 'iv d ai y c vo = vo ov . o = a3 0a"i c aoj ° ro o N ac v xp N O _ aas h is c m a s� . C Y o 0. 7 . _ w p o > > t �o = ° 0 M C1 vi Z r a "h^s^*p a� 'D a> top ca td ca •fl ca A O LL to O O w U to to �. 4. N b 'O ca c O c a v Z ¢ o G o z p V)O.17 F- U 10 �a o a0 O U ii A a`�a on at CQ �04- 0 r- d C .. k 4�. cd _ ��r1�� U ' k € C's _ :.� V i r c a bo o . 03 CJ aj jr U ca U as U cd II A 0 0 c a e a c n o a o to � A -C, A ,t • N U Ctl :o.ai cOd cd y y -o -.0' -cl ❑ '� co Ij ca ca - Ed Zs w ai N �w ��s O cd oA .'fl s ?? a~i G y"'C7 ,O a.;d �. w G a� •tn- v O p .!Z O -id,,� _C's � to a ° `� °. w AU z m 7q k cd y C G cd p N N O D C7 C � $ x ❑ -C p w v, y v o 'C v o to 0 > �O O ❑ o G w c p d-- _ s�•ao C 7 F p0.,'C r a0i •o •n a0i a0.i - o cn 00 - u U x 2 T M 00 17 � Qat w y eA c w a ea y T C T Q. y co o co Lz RUH r � •i .o r .a cd WC Eaz a c �:Z qcac ai� 06.0 co • $ c ° v) c ca -0 U W 3 Q ii 3 a � x7'wi, �•'o o � o '3 a + c 'a• c n R1, a, ° a p �• d�� - U ca U ca q 0 0 �V c c r p ZI. -w:+ O G s O v.' � U a U c� d > Ci 0 00 fA C ^ S 0 C5 En y r o . cd cc 0 w 10 wC3 oOJ > 0.1 a D w o ._ 3 _ .o D L) ty w 00 0 n o o = D q � �� +• 0 0 M :""' O d O 7 (],et U y p -O � � dam. No�� ��xz, ,� sE°� axas .�ca >moo y�ai 'c .�E .r::ca: ° nc s ❑ yo o _oa, _°3 N v Ccy'a ca > wc°n o� '� _oco > E_°camoao o E 0 c on°° .a n o� a - d d oca vc o = � 0 ca a) >'o 3 � UqII do" v .o a ca -o a 4.) a,cc = 0 3 O a c { � � � � o '° o v _ • '- � w a s o n 144 P64 c D c y 0 0 w o Y' Y ❑ o o •o 'a .c a3i c s° a> o Y ca o a, = T o °c = °a, P_' .S ° 3 ¢ o ca > O O ca cci a>i 3 a� .y > `E v ca x N o •� axi .p .E v 'E 3 ._ qo m p ca 00 Urd z os zo N w '� c �, t °. .c •a' c o , ° i c E o v T a a� O «> o ecoy 'o x ow o c ca CISa3 . Z � 'ro . a� c° 'ca X o ° ° Q c ° m car ca ti a r a °_' �o 0 o E 3 E ° E ca z En C) F ofd O Jnr^ rti. CD °w � U NOTIFICATION LIST 159220011 159230002 159230003 BARTLETT RICHARD J FIELD BROTHERS BODHAINE RANDALL C & C I TRE 4791 PACHECO BLVD 1187 CAMINO VALLECITO PO BOX 23366 MARTINEZ CA 94553 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 PLEASANT HILL CA 94523 159230006 161021009 161022001 CHURCH OF GOD AT MARTINEZ BRADDOCK& LOGAN ASSOCIATES NAREZ RICHARD S 4769 PACHECO BLVD PO BOX 5300 2504 ROLLING HILLS CT MARTINEZ CA 94553 DANVILLE CA 94526 ALAMO CA 94507 161050008 161262009 161262015 SHANNON HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSN ERDEI VICTOR N GUNSUL THOMAS 2777 ALVARADO ST 4736 PACHECO BLVD 4754 PACHECO BLVD SAN LEANDRO CA 94577 MARTINEZ CA 94553 MARTINEZ CA 94553 161262021 161262022 161270002 KNOBLOCH ROBERT&CHRISTINE OBRIEN AT PACHECO LLC LEWIS DEBORAH O FAMTR 4734 PACHECO BLVD 2001 WINWARD WAY#200 998 GRAYSON LN MARTINEZ CA 94553 SAN MATEO CA 94404 PLEASANT HILL CA 94523 161270011 161270017 161570001 KELLEHER WILLIAM J MCKIERNAN JOHN R TRE H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 906 HARBOR VIEW DR 1125 B ARNOLD DR#180 1306 MASTERSON LN MARTINEZ CA 94553 MARTINEZ CA 94553 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570002 161570003 161570004 H & B PROPEERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570005 161570006 161570007 H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570008 161570009 161570010 H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570011 161570012 161570013 H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570014 161570015 161570016 H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H &B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 S 161570017 161570018 161570019 H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570020 161570021 H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC COMMON AREA-TRACT7418 BUILDING INSPECTION 1306 MASTERSON LN 1306 MASTERSON LN (interoffice) LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 HISTORICAL RESOURCES PUBLIC WORKS-FLOOD CONTROL PUBLIC WORKS-ENGINEERING 1303 MAURICE AVENUE (interoffice) (interoffice) SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY ROHNERT PARK, CA 94928 CONTRA COSTA. MT. VIEW SANITARY CONTRA COSTA WATER DISTRICT FIRE DEPARTMENT P.O. BOX 2757 P.O. BOX H2O (interoffice) MARTINEZ, CA 94553 CONCORD, CA 94520 i CITY OF MARTINEZ MARTINEZ UNIFIED SCHOOL PACHECO MAC 525 HENRIETTA STREET' DISTRICT 5800 PACHECO BLVD. MARTINEZ,MARTINEZ, CA 94553 921 , CA 94552 A STREET PACHECO, CA 94553 DARWIN MYERS PATRICK ROCHE COUNTY GEOLOGIST COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING (interoffice) (interoffice) 2"d floor—651 Pine St. N. Wing 5th floor—651 Pine St. N.Wing GENERAL PLAN & ZONING MAP AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ra fit a no Q (� ii n d a .0 all TO�� IVOG .Q x ��„_ Lt ,}q, ixy *w r a• gv ' yt 'a' i.,� t.� >'`r"• L t �. 1 �\ -'" r J� �'N�"i.trs" r�.t t y r d ''�•',?. f � xKT , + ' aFP •+ °' t v i?"" �,�` «`� ,r a ya- �c, a'Ft i n :y`� t f ,.{t,.y •,^ r 'ti 71 " i } `r 4:1 14 1St �'� 1 �Y# '2 }4y4� � 11. V•'f f �o l 3 � �:F � a/ 4 �,� .,�^� sr'ac�,� � � fr r .� �`� �5�' '*51,�\P{� ear' - � tri �. '�� i r �,��.� T✓ ,✓.>a! . `"S'�7 y�^ � .+f:� O � Es ai,� .ty�.�4z�s+�x-�✓ `�\ �'�� '����� '� �^ �� !� b� O CV 5; T At `�`.5 y��d��•tSl�R i} *_, /� n �9..re �� ^�: �a°.• �`, �, �� 3"'s` E � >� � f .�`+,. � �.t �'{a V�% aq•�, � ui'=•e Y}r i s` f.L �' t - x 1 e,,r•y SFh a x., •..1,. y.'r-r. }d'ia h '<.�'.'s7 i� '�t1i�. 77 :» a a r .r"r� 6...?ytr � d'�'sah d #s ! '4xw•r3��� p.�r� �b, k� ; "•s•",` ' S >�q h y' s ,2 ^s trz' jg;t E , ii'ytiN r i �° `�r�a���:. T� *` p 4 � f� �}y` �� � ati `i`,����'f�,,,��r y.•ids�a ,z.; � i\,\..kz � K+ a�� C a L, r n,�a�✓, }'.�� c r "r\��sY ,is�;' k S t `� y, ✓•F;� a� ; Y/ I � , ��x�sr^ � :,.. ��� O � f� �,'3` � w! '(a'f, ✓��t w �'s 1� �"! �f ��,� ' � �5�.•. �O ,� -. � s-S �l' .: �" '.`� a 1aa. F .�.e .� �a,s<�7�1� zr f�"�'°'�• f,�.� •��t �i�`f; y� r`_ Q . �� a .. �•� � ,° z c '�'�a,rs.:'a 7 z.cs s.'" r"f"�,t'�-�'�� J°A! 'O 4r e RM6X � t. .�� f� e"� fi k`t' _4't � . - ✓_"' 3 �' n H'. to rsrS - u { siaAA # tt ■� 3 OR u s fir: a gyp ,1�?d um 's �r L •'" > e { t 7 f.X r kt Y Y 7 `F S ff'j,:,� r JA N �c � * ,. �h�����r �s��.�•������ f .. •t �• � j r 4r: °# � r.z�t ,",�,t` M'a,.,l.��� '"''� $f�.,�� i O- '• '_ �' ''� ��iLrm't '�. `t Y r r�'��� � ' �t a z '✓ z�i. 3., � '�', r 3�3 m� F +e, r t�.a'E�•ar �'�>y� b x }��rti r M` � x�}`� k<a.iF r-. '�.�� r' '\ L'.<s �3 �:,,. z N y�•-, x �s�! s t r € 5} F z `✓r•^ ?' N" �d• 1 �" Y �• a ,'�, , £M,'t x #` .y xs x` - ' 5 yid bxta 9 d 0 �z I .> s 4 a ..t 3>E k >.E c r Y�i"v• dl .Ly &�..-"' > T< s JsR Z � za"" �n�'x ,����� ��r�rk- '^ nA � •� / \2 v� }hTG amu° -f f � �'P[ ..CL t s z i ,iS s S f i•3) r ',• 4 4.seo-� r A Q ..T,. f', � a5A f t i s s * a �,a, t bes A r k �r s , S��,S a v ls•[�Q�ti�^ ,..1 kf et�sgrr"+�,#� �. x i 1 �' `S:. f _W h\ ! e �� •s- `` .; I-WS, fk, > y All R a A� z-:• � ���•l �(k��S - J � � _.. z� �,4� '�..; ��gt fl s /� apl� t� ���ra n �+'{ ! � P � �'� �, ,.,,r3� - •..t'� � f�� � p �A �P ?f��t,..•:�r s�� �� I��,^t� ���lr 3.. e �M �: � � G :<. ".� -� � 6� dd����Y,�g1 a L �j f .t F� S� �h § i F,nom._ r �", � �3 ®{�ttij➢ �I all ,�Um ����� }N +"�t�� f ` 9,LL +et{��r^ t J o�;tY - ` � a F {`,f .J'f i _ y..r" ✓'. �*� �,�g�#tb ! �t cS`n�-. +..� �. d t y lir,, a- •-�f� �-'p J•.r y� � t �. Y'.y _ - .. , .. �. §.,. i0. x sslll V r r .A� r g• NE T ((j k �,�`.r ���• s �F r v �; � ? 1 �,rF'`• F w���y-� .TUU -.a "t�t• � ��� ` '�� � AAw- 1 c - Xl3 At� if -47 A: 1 An fi r -.;1_? r,',y „ib `c - d- n e.. -d vo •5 1� s _ f"s. � t ,kms INV r "all r VESTING TENTATIVE MAP AAT V91ENVr AkAq ALAN WY 8011A Ify PRE. � Y� 11wF. 2 io 20 40 Teown Df? Aw A IN ffST I INCH = 2'0 F7 ' ; s ` F tet ' c, \VW/rc Y MAP 7 NOT TO SCALE , C> 19 A 0 1, till:nAs Z ry B ;.k a --t"OV,ALL 110W NAM V0 BE PAD Vo r PC cm IMAM, 0.6, cowomm SlWr=VM WM A�l FM �2 ",W a Imes ME ww SFW�Lom%0W PAD at of� (t)FWT, T�AM VRM w awm "m �wm. A-4 X , AS ftV%X ER EP J ww) 4. 37-�7, 19�27. A�Y IJPJCAL GRADING FLAT PAD LOT DETAIL NOT TO SCALE 4 4v 0 40,0* FERAL NOTES: 2. BILL KELLEHER 4-0— r)— 906 HARBOR NEW DR. 71 0, tom MARTNEZ.CA 94553 25' lk PINE O 12'. DIA_ (925)370-6078 0> EUCL. TREE EXISTING LAND USES; SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE 0 EXISTING GENERAL PLAN: MULTI-FAMILY LOW DENSITY -11.9 D.U. /NET ACRE), C., (7.3 W c) EX. HOUSE TO BE REMOVED 10 DIA. R: PRESENT ZONING: M-12(12 D.U. /GROSS ACRE) rqz WALNUT REZONE TO P-1 % is*DIA, 3; z -14UMBER OF LOTS PROPOSED: 8 PINE— 0 (A Z*ATER SUPPLY: C.C.W.D. < P=73.1 2 is'DIAL A , Z. m SEWAGE., MOUNTAIN VIEW SANITARY DISTRICT 0 PINE ASSESSORS PARCELS: 161-270-011 Go w 1 5,274 S F. (NET) P=68.1 P=63.3 AREA: 1.10 ACRES 16"DIA.PINE 6,647 MAXIMUM LOT SIZE: 5,987 SQ.FT.(LOT 8) 12*Olk PINE 4,000:1S.F. (NET),MINIMUM LOT SIZE: 4,000 SO.FT, U) 5,4d 00 Sr 51000 (GROSS)AVERAGE LOT SIZE: 4,734 SO.FT. (GROSS) 7 27 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE IL 00 S.F F ,�aOSS DENSITY: S. 0 + EX. SPOT ELEVATION LIJ EXISTV BOUNDARY EX.CHAIN LINK FENCE F-WAY LINES TY LINES STREET LIGHT J LINES E, LES ON SITE WILL HAVE ?RANT 4i NEW SLOPE z GRADING QUANTITIES NOTALL TR :w CUT: 1270 TO BE REMOVED DURING (.API"WBER kDE REMEDIAL GRADING. + STREET GRADE&DIRECTION VP FILE: 2670 CY INSION IMPORT. 1400 CY NE NEW PAVEMENT z ANHOLE(EXIST) jFB ODDINr INLET(EXIST) EXISTING PAVEMENT IANHOLE(PROPOSED) R/W R/W ItRAIN LINE NEW CONCRETELU AIN CATCH BASIN 39, NL &SIZE EXISTING CONCRETE So* SION 8944 WEATHERLY PLACE CwCREIEVESTING TENTATIVE MAP lu lu 2X & PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN COSTA COUNTY CAUFORNIA ME'A'CURB W &GUTTER(CC 201) SECTION PER 4'P.C.C.SIDEWALK III R VALUE 4'P.C.C.SIDEWAA hd=ak� 1w.&4'CLASS 11 AB.TYP. 4.CLASS 11 A[ civillond _WEATHERLY LANE engineering surveying Y _t."I.y R..o Suit.C W.1—t Geek,CA.94598 Phone:925 937-9333 0 V IDRAWN N.G.S. JC"�CKED D.Ol J�Moob 200455 . ISHEET 1 OF 0 REDUCED SCALE MAP z � � - y MM tikes4Alow See Area Policies for: -Vine Hill Pachee �Trt'_ 41VY v`t 3 °r!t , �\ nt 07. Oil 0 i _ _ •, ^_ - .. "`. "._ spy `i ,� `i 0- 13 ;HOMESTEAD TR. - 1 M.B.B-42. u' ;:9 3-20-68 M�'J ZZ-1�}"�O�" PB 26 #� 159 1"=200' TRACT 7418 t M.B.415-26 $2 ID �a F roy 06 57 4 1.48A !yJ i.l V. q 1.1 Ac. 0 i 270 j 02 3.00Ac. Q5Ac. y� 13 Sg ;i i W.CORIUT C VINE HILL EAD TR ft0uf5t CAN N t— JUN 20 2000 Aro" '.. REVISED C IANGE BY l 102201-11.00 TRACT 7,118 HR 1"' ASSESSOR'S MAP - BOOK :161 :. PAGE :27 ASS 01 11-oD CONTRA CC'STA COUNTY.f i PLAN ELEVATIONS U, V w2l", ,all OIJ Cl - C_- PLAN I - 1787 SF rn FLOOR PLAN & ELEVATIONS PLAN 2 - 1871 SF FLOOR PLAN & ELEVATIONS � e N� N9 ,d• le'o l941 In' V40 D'-I 4'-0 V2' -0 42' W-0- 4' • OSaaflEGT 24 oven fifiRl@t WITCH M4DVIOJ i LIEF W 1 it rp4w 7E 7 Aft Prim Pm VALVE MDTKoD K\m MSM - D. 404Oi A / D:f 6HD' 1O4/' 9/ao�L— 663D.�Sl' SAGrot PKIMKIrCIo req ` wl_UL A f MPROVED SIM �A $eiN Sw w �RK�ST mails ED Lax --- RKF rw. 4 9O'STOVE w MOOD! U' {, -" aPr 2k4' Y. t, ~---'----~ LIeMT NC HMO MLMV �• ---- GRANDE ROOMSPACE PROVIM KATM LIE MI 'V6FI "r ` • /' oa KKe� sm 2e6e sc 7 I-WIll 2aMMRIMTW/ � ie w cam 4 M smm �' / 17-10• .w'_2' arllalUU.. L=0.1- lSi9t lEAT6L 40 6AL ON1.OM E'MI6M f V�TFNAM /r I P��OMaFaY .—_ lfRDYICE PRF961RE I4�EP Yt1VEW DRAM TO i t APM«pyID)W 11010R.«,N 0ft91DE. - i' i SMOM AMR&MAILS. MiR"4 NSTALL PER 6114 KwArll ,�. ;PAG«K1tER NEATER TD ClJITY r4n+ i / SPEa1PrA 4 9 9 Q 11EN.4.Atlolar rat TnLE N REawRa REOPX401A lOa. 9u o Q Q AlII)R ti /I'RPAD@ SVD'GYP BP.TM X'AT ALL MAILS 1 aaLM i AT GARAGE,OR PROVIDE SVD'GTP.W.'TT'rE X'Ai I 2466 MG T8' TD. �{ 6AAh5E SIDE Of SEf.0b MAOR Mt"*AT GARAGE C. V. n SIDE OP FI W 1 sw4w MA7R K U$Will GARAGE, / fi LIVNS,No AT MW PLOOR Mi 9RPORFii48CfCND MOOR MTAMN6.ME DETNL 502) A �6A4 RUMOR VatT GARAGE / _ 7 11"m 51 N f Atl N AT"C 0VM UYM SPAa.UXATEN TO �t DE Wnlft&!LV N TIE MMD.Ml SM LIE � 're ND I.,514117-off VALVE WY U&s W 9'aLEAA �' A A A R'AOE AT SID .101.4 RN+R.M:ONOE aaRO./ 4'-U' ,_T. N8 N.y N9 mc AIR 4 Idl Mal"GYrT.6 41. Y Q Ih Y\AMSOflxT�'. b 2z rwL � c tl4f708ARASE paaftr," \ - UbLM STAR -- Tim fT.POlt MD'tCi�� if±P,T. a. LIP w1 2'-s In' '-Id si s'-0 yr 'r s n'-s• s r-s V2' t If.,, 4'-4• 2111• m Y o PORCH fl -2' O D N.D N9 .4a:;0.4 FiR5T FLOOR PLAN L e.s oan. oa4p'w+'ae:wa Meµ4M.paT.OSa 3111A ri1rd+A4«N^G«a'ri".aEctlaRc Ei.EYATiC{-A 4.Iuw+rea+rA«a.ascT«w0a i «amk+.ww ""•«waouasa -7 sF c e NID N'! 17' at. S.T. 44' M-T' 4 T V2" 2'-4- -1 'x % — —y artwKw%I MMIWAB 6m t VMI s,N a'alowo it. T.0 Im t MALS.FOOM 4 ISTALL MR �, I ` 4Rscc"�"'°Hs ,lois f MEATH fi 4 " air t - f MSR IND FA m �` / SlalR Fm wI gttw ATH 2 BR-2/RETREAT �' e i BR-4 �o RM s r e'er i 6 � evcNaer � 9Y■W ATrC AC42M91'iH. �I $ Y 9i_ MOW.MTA .M "PMK - sivromLT.Mr.4 '*fftff.lxAI L'MMw S NT `•�` { ' iD. ...i TO auk' S Y ` `,1/1� .i o AN 4 Y2T-OVKMAM t=- 7 ��RA Lg / ..fit � FW MESAL � EYGli FM.(M � 53' 4-9• 0 � ,'� q � LAUND - � LNAI y 206 NG sw. (� .eAIM - - Ery H C. V.``- 46Da er ort. \ su � BR'3/LOPT j i INI LOFTfiEGH A O'ACr4�Ct , tt arv+rcr- 1 t taw WALL § ti+�76'Rfdt � `•' Y tV Iii' to ta' VOL. p aosoSL ® ra� ;` T atiDw Y nnr�r4:'', bin l2-+M FS Off,mcm&MK -+T I � i --4'-411/2' 4'-4 V2' 940 V2' a'-m e'-e• sxo' c s u.s Ne SEGOND FLOOR. PLAN x� SIVATION-.A 4 sd LI PLAN 4 — "7 8 7 sc= Q ff -LONG.IV41DW TLC ROLA W 0a mt MPI w .. .. 03 snow o72d Paw MH— (TVP. —SITYCO(TyP} I tl II j� ------- — 2W rM rI OOR M MPR M_ i l i T-i6'Jl4VOP MPR.M. I DOYlCe=Mv) ti it it ( I tl �� I It II cm.PAD 11 I i Ft 1 _ HM rWIM76M P BMW AT?V"ATM PLATE WE REAR ALS EXT04OR STUGGO MHAUS. ELEVATION-A ai 12 02 12 is I` D.1 d [� / S=W et AS 20.6 POM4 TRM COtIC.'NKIBC7A'TLE -- '4' I DA ❑�^' . ROOF o/904 PEST;TYp1 13 I alt i r L.J❑ ........... __b 6''IO 9!4"MtDMi Ipl MT. I rrJ � MW 0/310 FOAM TRIM lTTP1 + t I f 1 SMW o/24 POM IMM ` I I I.1 1 t 11 ti � I � f pYP.•SpXS 1 IO:AW. I t I I I t i t S11C.CO o/31b FOAM iRLM Mr) 6MR Eh00"OMlfXL117VE 'iElt MM) 69M l ,t ..FLAB"MIYP) + t+_ 1 t 1 i i SVMim(MTM'1 al of It Q L3 li X11 ________J _ `+`..-. _ _ -._.._.._ 4.—.�._ _ M_ 9'-P RT.MTS 9 i Y9Ff_RT.Mf. _ ._._ .�y_.__. _._.------- _ y.._. ._ _. M MD0.M. l'' _'. --- ---.._._7„ t� •P'L03H`.Mi'OM'i tiDR M(y aNOCO N31d3 F3W 71Tot(T1'P) T +t I yf ST i —. ._._ ew i'fYP1 L' I t t t U&AW AD(TTP/ L uat+,es snow a.,W MO,w n9M MN 17 1 StiY.Go eJ 310 FOAM T"MP} D.1 i 1 �(''`�{ I 7316496`D!'LORATNE 51irtTER pp _ F-- _ +1 .._. rl 1 r—'—' — *"— r"K.AL VFL"FLIM MiKEt6R. t K40FX WATE W6T C4ZARAWZ R9OU waw4 X401 FRONT ELEVATION-A t"7 8.7 SF 0 517 - a 1 CIM,'%ADEHDA'TOE POOP*/6a rtlT WM!Ft —"— — 914_PLT.Hr_ $- _ - M - _ f' S17Y.E0 aI7HFOAN TR v v LEg '� hTP.I SI06/MENU li mew pyr) ii bIQ PSt ft:D17R _ •..Y-�.4�-���-"=_)W'.�v i i _ 1 i y 9'-0 914_PLT.Nr� ff ii II 1 It j 111L I 11 DDMM23POR rrrvl—� 11 Y-D' ii I( I TYP II IJ 1{ GOr.PAD r 1 f O'-0'PGC FiDOR Nam �+a/G1E MEM ELP$D AT PQT�ATiOH PLATE L,E RI&HT ON Nl EXiBpO[i7iLW 6TlD 1VO15. ELEVATION-A FI"4 .12 S 12 03 y. :i r __I ty,�;"}' :1,•j, P40FOf"RLTmn — r.,,t}.,,T-;.r�,-{� _ e .. `r't"f1 i: 1�" D.1 }{,..✓ ,� {"�1«7.' :i"i t.. ._ _. _._ 6'-0 8/4'PLT.HT. 6'-10 9/4'1'FOW HOR HT, i t i i 6TUGU?e/2.6 FOAM T Sn"O V/2A FOAM T !' 1. �1 �I ffTP.680161 PEND (61 ON60'VW49ATM I I I I 65M FLASMW rMTP)— rl ' 8`''la_r?:• 1 !. Znd 1`GL PLOOR_ — _ ii ..(..I;-;.r".{-ri•Ts"' r9'-09l4'PLL Hf. — — ' — — — — ._._._ 6TtGt0 Pl]W FGN1� 6AG1.0 li 1 ii 5=40 011*FOAM' " W116'.mowx YEWS O'-0"FlH P1.00R tUtL, }} nvlo&VIUTY PETS PROVIDE MEW VORM AT P01,10ATIOI PLATE UM LEST REPT 7�.W G�TYM VIU ON ALL EMIMOR STW/*SW KALLS. ELEVATION-A IqAr-J It (-7'9 7 sF MLT D •LOM..YM TLE -',s P'"aa6.MLT mP1 Rptl 14 -amat(mJ 03 S/4'RT.err. r FD2 xr_ �yo s/4•reu'�wit xr. -WWW a 204 FOAM TRM— ' - (eYP.•ems 4 RbW I' i� ._ _.--.— —._._._ _._._.—._._._.---.—._._._.--- _ _ — _ Nid_RM_PlD_OR_ _ _ — T, 1'-10 9/4'YfDW MDR M. f -DOWtlPGIIf i COIL.PAD 'I 'i C-0'RN.FLOOR N7IG FROJDE MW VR=AT MWAnOM rare Ue 'REAR ON ALL PX NWR sn"o alto VINES. ELEVATION-B CGI,.rM0@DA'TLE Q POR'o/sob mT") I S Q 14')Q4'ARO#®MOCK VENe-- 57LG40 o/26 APOW POM TRIM D.1 aurae m r1 ® earl K..a#w rtlP) Y FDR M_ 610 9H'ttDtl IDR M_ 6nc400/6.8FMN/R64hTPo-- i iii'+ SnKl.Od2o<.FOAM IWMfM) •STV W ol204 POM MS (fYP.0 we 1 RENO -S11Kt4(M) Q SU4.0 a 20 FOAM WM(ITP)— ; II'$'R.T.M.•PORCM 9'-0 9/4'PLT.M. —�- 1FDRM_ — ' i 1'-10 9/4'1'fDt1+DR FR_ SRrW a 206 FOAM MM MM) I)WW AOOPPSs) 5" ' EDIDEIDDEDEI17 A i ;; -S11GL0 a hH FOAM iRRI ' I1--�� ,i " SIW"d 24 FOAM TRIM I M clo 0/206 raw rm MTP)--W7, �.a.LJ a i i ' SIUCCO o/2.6 FpW TRIM ITTP/ 14ti6 MOMo<Vatrs ��a a o 0 0 0Elfll - '. LY 0'flM FLOOR.— — rfm&uruff!else M.A zmff. X408 MTE MALT CLEARA 9 OWN.d arr. WrLR1'Co) - FRONT ELEVATION-B PLA,J i - 1-7 -7 SF Q 6(—. Q C,=.IIAOBDA'1LE - v+� 1'(l''1{1{-�ffL'1 I•�'i{'-�Y It ROR'aam TILT Mr) �+1I r,r I'yt`��-�- - 03 .:"1 • eiITTTaL trrP) D'� - - - 9/4'VWM NX M_ ,.. .- --------- - -.-._.�.I 11 J 1 gTiCI.O a 24 FOAM TRSI SDES r REIW n n aw.co hTP) I - - - I 11 II - --- - -- II I I 2'd RFL BOOR - i n is - - -'- - li I liii III n ii I'I I I DOIYtlPGVf(ITP1— 11 II 1 ii i� I 1 ii 11 II j� II 11 CIM.PAD FRL FLOOR el _ ._.- ... /PPIJIDE VWP SCF®AT FOWATION PLATE LSC - RIGHT ON ALL E%TBWR STKOO STD MALLS. ELEVATION-B 12 Q '+yam' } OOIL.N�OBDA'TLE - s f L Pna a ea FELT(Tw) I � 1 { I �HSQ4'AFG®FDCK VEM LJ SUC40 0/2E MUM Fa 03 wnm - ----- - --- trip) - A.b'-109/4 WmW ICR Its_ 1 S=W a b*FOAM M M L=J `-i-' W STUCCO o/n FM TRM (ITP.•SDG41 REA1tl II JJ�� 1, 11 S=0 a 206 FOAM TRIM 7TOO RN.FLOdi • �. -;i T-10 9/4'YrD1T IDR M_ n n DDVWROUT(TYP)-- 11 I sTCCO e/2b FOAM TIM II i1 M5d'MONDX Ym d-0'PRL FLOOR .-.- - N0M ---- T m%&VIRITY WER PLO MME MV SC MD AT PP"ATICTI PLATE LRC LEST ��N MDoa� ON ALL E)ORRIDR STLCO STD Was. ELEVATION-B -7 SF u • —caw.l6reoA•TrE — 1 e Rda'a sa FLT MM) • —6R791(MI 7F1 IOR M_ b'-10 9/a"Yt07W!GR M. -51=0 02x4 FDAM,RM- Mr.a Sim 4 REMry ,I —sTlecorrTn II '1 I jl R I; II �i OOVOOF Of 1; I II L II 1' - 1 I� II it ;i II UM,PAD OW FIIL FLOOR.— — { ._. irli6 FROAM PEEP 9G®AT PaWATIGN PLATE LAE REAR ON ALL EXTERIOR STV"SlW KILLS. ELEVATION-G 12 -COW,1"OVA'TSE 12 is ROOF a/SOF FIST MITI I I I t —6Dnac(rMJ J1 03 "j.1 s Dl — W fm M_ b'-10:Na'Ydm11 ISR M_ — N:— — — - - '— — '—'— - - - 71 SAC40 o/2.4 FOAM TRIM (rM,a SIDES,REAw i; 06 i STUXO o/bb FOAM T"fm) SWW a/26 FOM,RM(TTP) ,i GSM FLA6I61.i s o/46 FOAM T ") I' D1 "O M Ll fttP) I A=FL MMR Sox I sTIKCO o/Sx6 o/26 FOAM TRM �' -------- ------- 1 _ _ _ _ r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2nd FRl FLOOR � 9'-0 9/a•PLT.M_ — — YI!OR M_ 17 1 i T ID9/,•FPID)1 HDR HL _ surco(Tyr) POF40POVt STLC40 a/2xb FOAM TRIM(tyP) 51MCO o/2,6 FOAM TRW I 4W W4NOX NSRSI, ----- ! PR a I�7I ILS--111 F 01 1I -_f __ J _ . F.— 'I FP. �. FP. i� '' 01-0•flR FLOOR TTPIOAL DIILITY MER FLAaKwr. (CCORDMM EXALT OIEAR&W. REGIT6.R/G 4 VM"W) FRONT ELEVATION-G PL.A„J 1 - 1-7 9 -7 . ' � rod:.TMODIDA'TLE }1 ROM a"FELT(TYP) 1 t afn eurTac(rm) ; tii r I d-0 9/4'RT.M. III--I�--II I u I II I II I i i ' sMCW o/2.4 FOAM n u Snow hTPI I a i i -�i _ 2d FIN FLOOR ' E :l I I rw C I I I I' GONfi.PAD i n i i O'-0'FIN FLOOR ------------ NOIR PWVE YOF SCOM AT FOLNDATION PLATE LM I GHT ON ALL Wast R 57KC4.51ty VOLLS. ELEVATION-G 12 al— I ;ti . PDOF.o// LT TILE T I f y PODF 9a PELT(TTP) 12 M1 ..�L T '� '�}i,1_ �•1 - - -' b'-0 9N_RT.M.. - T��; 6'-10 9/4'YOm1V roR M_ ii la 111 ©ii I ,'� �' sTlww a sw POA711! � � i' fitT•.•61D6�ReAN aTucco a aas FOAYI TO sTLrco a/bO POAM TR n IUDD PLANTER box- I �S -� Stucco o/A6 o/aasF _.-._._._ -.-.-.---.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.- ---'- -.-.-'- -'- - -'- r'� - .... 9'-0M d9/4_FLT. _ - {, �T40 4/4'Y#M HDR HT_ - - - - - - -'- --- - - - -'- - i STUCCO o/ado AMC n ' LJSHTW AODRM6 S*N MCC---i _.� i I I Oorlep r(tTP1- ! Stucco o/ae FOAM n I TYP.* MSS'lIOIIOX N9715 I �g TTPICAL mm mm PROV'WE YEW SCI®AT FOWATION PLATE LINE LEFT (C401�TEWT rA IOR ON ALL EXI9167=Snv FVLLS. ELEVATION-G ! t�L A-"J I e V u GOAL.VACM'TLE �s moor a Sol FELT MP) uj ....... . T640 9/4'YCOW MDR M. Sr=e/2M FOAM or.6 WES r REAM _ _ ,. TRW r ,1 _6TLccoTTm) �: " 2W FTML FLOOR OYl IDR M_ i . 4'YfmY1 HDR M_ —DOWtlR'+Uf frTP) �i 'i i' i OOC..PAD - NM PRWM AMP GMW AT POMATM PLATE LAE ON ALL W(TMWR ow"sw rA S. REAR ELEVATION-D C.M.YUGE4lDA'TEL 4, IS ROOF o/SEL MTMP) 12 5(— D.1 } W dr-Marx tarAm WTAL. Gvnm 9/4'R.T.M. _.._. 6 10 9/4 FAD%MDR M_ 6T,=a/tib FOAM TRIM MP) ® ® ® I I 08 f' 311k:G0 0/2�6 FOAM TRIM MPI 11KG0 a/2M POMI TRIM I D.1 65M RA51615(ITP) 6 MP.6 5m r REw (4) Wd PECORATWE StMER MPI WH STWGO 6126 RAW TR61 MP) 9TI=ot 2J0 KWI TW— _ --------- ...... .— _.—.—._ — —_ — 1--'Lr f- r.`;•. '_ .2d NI1 PLO0R 10'-09/4'PL: .T.My •PORGM D.1 .. IT. HT.0 Pow NDW IDR M_ _ i 940 9/4'YfDW HDR M_ . onrzo 2N MOM TRW ' ❑ '' i i i SN:l.O o/hb FOAMTRW MP) IV40 O 0/V Z LlAlrl®AMM"616N— ' I I El Mir=o/2`6 FOAM rRW(M) DDPr15Pavr MP) El❑❑El El D o 6TIY.tO a/2i6 POAM TRW(ttP) ,i � MgpXrar6 D[i CJ E::i Ci E] 5 Fll ----- ' `g (� __ - ; O'-0'PIN.FLOOR —- Loon - J - - TYPICAL VILITY M M PLA 45458. (f.00Fo7rNTE OW GLP/.RWIGI: FRONT RERT..W LITY 1 1rnU"GO) ELEVATION-D A-A-i (- 17'R-7 sF D 12 {�}! _ f T) '"� 14+"T4 r wf'�'• r I. (.r, i i� ��' � ,j�J,..-�, Cie ID1 qtr y �)iI +1 4YkrtTEt ItTP3 9/•PLT.M_ -�- - ^- i I ,1?96t''--0Ld10I0P85E/9/4L/44'F_'PLPNOL►TTtOm'J.RWM1 4M.SSMGDTS7LIRYCR.OGMOOM_ IO,M/ 3) 4 P6N (M.•SM t WAP) er--- 00"apam- ---.-.-._ _ _._.--- _ — _ — _ T R0( - i li I 1 II ii it ` it II i' O ii i WK.PAD )OTE �!j� PRDIDE PEEP W=AT rawAram PLATE LEE 4 G�iT - - ON All amWR sr"10 SILO r^L9 ELEVATION-D 12 ft. �,4 '2 c %V"K nx`' ' oreROOFO"FELT(TTP) A.M=L(%AS!✓$!I J6UTR6") 'i. •y. +6'-0 s/4'PLT.HT. b=IR9/4'Y647P1 F67R M. 0 i i 9TSCo00/306 fi7m"I it STU'.00 o/3M MMI TR6 u SIDE,t REA4t3 (4)t6,*al mfORA"i . �i _py,•, -MMt PtMFMS fYTP) Sni=0/36 POAM M I I I I M -I'- - 310 RIM.F4X71t u SU=a/340 POAM�.. 104•FLT.M. d_9'-09/4_PLT.M` .-... .m.-.- - -•-.- - -'-.- --- _.-.._ _.._ _ _._..,.._.. 11�'f4 GORtl16GORkt'C ii SYWW a ZO FOAM TRI Fl410E"""~'1 i _ LIMAM AODRESs 916) li a it u STXW a/24 FOAM TW M54S'MOIbx YTMs FLOOR PROVIDE/@'SMW AT POMDATION PLATE LIM - TYFlGAL 9T0JTY MW I ON ALL EXRRiOR MW SAD KALI$ i ��� IooORDmm EXALT Cu L RWU/att t VMff ELEVATION-D 9'7 sF G 6 ' A73 A29 LN"-OF 90 PIOCR ADO& AiG OISCONECT t, 6WTON PAD I IPAD I I I +' SL TEPP %.EW 4050 Q .te UP"Ce y 6NKW OISPDSA. r— I D1� �`• BRKI=9T PIM-fM ICTALI/ / Pw+me kT MAU �, VNWL icEo IWP►oVEO) � F 1T��Ly�,LT�T `� e'SIRROIRO A4 VALY9 wov Form�Ntlr-0R 4 \ WwP�W STOLE w WW PANLIONf AW WFLO NNQ%ltFAMIe cAe 6cuAlt®ON EV9LY -0' IIICNE'ALE FROM!YN1Cl E T / i-- X16 T LEE w*W_OPP VALVE _i R ort, m FOR ICE PNM A 7i ml T-6 yr 94'V MLT1In' - --y ,I 9'-0 W A AZ: 7 ",.J( I PROVIDE A29 PNIER SIS•TYR/ /W6H MTPOOL PROVDE PRESSURE f I 1 9C 6YP. RBJEF VALVE W PRM TO OIIPJIDE OD.UDEN !{I SO ATTIC ALGEF6 W r 9^ II STARS m 10'LL VERs,CLEAR ABT. 1766E5C CLO EY,20"M �/O O LL PWA,SWTGEJ)LT. - 6x4 P10fOX RAYED wCLOSEIt l YL 51RIP � 1 OMET.LOCATE VRIa- i 11 \ 7' 4-T' 5 c 170'OF FAL.PROVIDE 51 ICE PLATFORM FM IFIL o y _ PW 1 ItA7lR MAIM TO GODLY WTI I PROVIDE 117-X a M O1 — RESLI AT016 PER TITS 74 RE(MIIREMMS. I 4m TYPE PAI.(RE. I I =T T '1WNS) &ARA&E ' m cart. - axrlALl °' x R p71Fi 1 LME OF 90 �, S PRDVOE 5J6.6YP!ID.TRE)CAT ALL YViJ-.. FLOOR AaO& �GFO.IK AT 6M(A6E OR PROVI7E 8/D'6YP.W. PAIL KW RAL -- TRE r AT 6A A6E EIDE OF OW.*V FLOOR M*",AT 6ARAGe SIDE OF MT 1 SECAO FLOCK HALLS SEIPM 6ARW LNN6,NO AT FIRST FLOCK PULLS SIPFORDN6 SECAO FLOCK 1 615 W AP S El PR*"OTE.OCTAL IWX FOfE I VJWATM 4 LIVING PAU N ATTIC OM LJVN6 SPAM LMAWI TO 4YGAMET /SE DE1604m N TIE Few.PROTIDE 6A1 LM ( INW-M VALVE IIOV.IS.1 MN O'CLEAR I EP SPACE AT MM,TOP 1 REAR PROVIDE CAO. I AR 4 IWALL FUR UIC CAW.6 6 T. ww 6ARA6E DOOR ENTRY`. ----1 LITE OF SWONV --- :� ADOMMS -____`_L N51611 � __--_-----'----�- Pip r 4 B•9" r s I Y-0 T-o" n N Cecil" PORCH nca,oA a „nlencEet a— — —F '7 y ;NoP°ial^I°WwM ftA CECtto6t J In tr66etN 1FOIM 4, VNF6IFNI�°1CFL!062 ID'-0' I9'rf• a ooaw ,aa 6 =mr WaEnO"Mb W+.CEC 7101<7 /. :::=None*odm.M� t00i 7 1 W C x10.70. p 14 L r.Uh l w,6MM vl q G 70x. ('b yyAeMlr�4),TIM 21' eatW10.UOO Vo Y. 9 6. Snob tw. �1xoY,pcnery A79 A25 4104. n• 11.R�aw16 e04yp Fdul�i on nA/ot6 ' R gNOyF+lpn•Waeue6ralewb6.0Fc�IGeG. Cnleru21rccdf' 5-:04 21 h.drwmoudctspffCF:C 216-12. Uedir,t,d20A FIRST FLOOR PLAN 0oe.7 pNwame.CEC 2 10@4. wM t>.wya„r,6 p,,,1 u.ywcu.ge clrcuil for b00valm Dulles 1—(:EC210-I 1(cU 4710. ELEVATION-A Z _ ( 4s-7 ( 8F _ - ` L p A2S Ase W-W r SL TT wl------ w"Ve PAW F \ :9 -----------t 24-11IM-1,111M— SOK w OWOSAL f`I L1b—.'1 \11 1 Nov Form wo"m �i7�� ff �i b'K+MI�^T xs MA7tl49E nt 9tvl'-oR 9 A F gnaw W( e Gwasr - C km Saw= 0 — 1 p �+ CAW b•.e' ------- Q G 0/1/ W 6000 er tv 79•Re41,11,MT,* 166D ML L1K E LAE w*M�Vxro r--,� - -- `- X 6562 R FOR IKAM = a 12 -Px - v tut %%90'+RRM"FEAR AWW AM ACCM 4 w s110FeJO✓9TAU ra%K S"TCJEO LT. ¢ 8V-4' t4AP1' q $ P rlxT..amtT.taAre YN M 70'OF FIA.FROYIDE rrmet rRONOc!tl-SMW MATFOW Fot IML KI'�• in emiss orr"ML.IRE• ` .wvm' " 4 erczrrals) � n• ra ni6lac srAce w eYSM+erx � r �R1.5 W-1 r DRAM lel VY 1, 4 woo op . YMrj,Y TO WY NV Gy ,E�, ORM SPALL yaw/ J TOO mam I c".WM CAn v1 M BATH S MmWR ' I MSR c �t f VA;AM ET ``� 641ib0'9NLYfR D/uE Mail NV ` w 1".6LAM 4 -- ---'-� '-46Wa Ww -- n n p opt sea.sf vft -S I 9'q' 6'•D' I L 10%xplx 6-M,112 M COC 1207 ZT ---__-_,-_---- ..e.or 6. am..cbca10A 4'•0 or r-II' la 5' a.sn0 N .,aw ooa A i iW6.n .. **gh o".CBC 710 9No pa W-6. �,�, G.61Nn..Y r•MNem.0 CBC 1007.7.7 Nf&.0 6.! qhn.CaC 2 t(0 L IWA40 32,-0, •N IrAs t.h.0 6 Outle .wfnMt 2J'N.boor a 17xd witlin lo,.f t-hoar 7. B.w N NAin.eri+I.nemOt lly"**d e.." errors.COC 1007 7.1 Ma. 7.Sr7'lyp.'t Oyptwn Ix+AN Miw..n V-"02.4 a (4U IU A29 Ay,D 6+es•tlor•...rnnrrbn0 t,d{x :WCo02.J ploy uraa.awuwJys.COC 1007.7 3 5 10 16.C7car x.Yrcwai xuoMacMl li0nunq m t:cneu oT..]J 1.aA5ErOND FLOOR duor C Gva .s.a.n Tma 24 • 11 Sasmic Nr.p t NwrmAl�r,panaM 11 No P FLEVATION-A 1.rd a aw+n..er.erc 7tD.s 4 coi 7 ww 12C•riNM comausuon..r lo+wn+a+la.+ar 11 NMA .rw M—,CPG 5C T.GMC 707 Usw SF MJ 02 D.1 FM MRK VMD 12 12 — II II II II II II II II II rll PLOT ic.m II ----- - ---- - --------- -'----- -----I� 11 Il._._._ A T-w 9/4'FlOYI IDIC M. ------ 1 I I I - -- - - -'-'- -'ti - - OL II II II II II II II II II _ II jI II II II II 11 11 II II II II 'F a-0'FIM.FwoR II II V,-_-.- Y�SLI®AT PLNDATION KATE LSE REAR di ALL OIiQtIOR 81U000 DT10 NMLS. ELEVATION-A n 12 F— TU �6 mgr) R2. I 6 W TRM 03 9/4 D'-0 9/4'PLT.M. ' — D1 9/• 6'-10 9/4"MDR M. _ w MOM IM(ITFJ ` — — — — \11 // D1lGL0 M aro FOMI IRW — w raw mr) I I I I I I — �-I I I I I _ OSM FLASMIfb fTYP) — wJ II I Il II w TRw"JLL I I Il 07 TPP) 1 --- --------- — 2d Plil MOOR_ 7H toi,14•PLT_M_ —.—,_._L !'OIA'PLT.M_ VW FOAM TRIM I I i I I sTucco w 6d FaW 71tlM sleM 17 II i II D,1 - _ , I sneco of 2v6 FOM TRW MWJ Li �'" FRONT ELEVATION-A r i LONG 1NgO0A•TLL' b r u woF a ea RLL MM) �... '� 7-14544'LopdM Mg � I br I IdM eLAbrgb ffT) wrreertTF} 03 640 9/4•IDR HT 3 MEi I 01 1 �� I I I I w=o'a aN rwm To II II II II I I I I D01?EPWf fTTP�— II 11 II rr s r I I I I I I Awa�LoII.AItr rtTr)- _ I I I I I I — $rao ei4 war NDR NT - 1 - - - tr- - - - - - - -.'- - - —- - - - - - -r n II- - $-'-- - -'- - I II 11 j j 11 I I sneco�) II II I 11 11 II S II II 11 j1 II II II o I I I I I I Late.FAP II II I� II II II I btp• II II II FROM RIGHT CH ALL 1@SLIT»AT FOIIDAA6.M1E LIE ' dl ALL CN1�77aR 51ULG0 STLA YMLLS. ELEVATION-A 12 6 �{��T .X,F1";.r�� �• � Lit 'F';�_',,ri e.��•I.rT .,, t t� �'I.`ly.t � {. care.wcreoA•Tue- T Y•("4."L{1 x 1 } y r7rr!Lti1 03 {� 14Y� si j _y-jt`•` { bneco a as FOAM Tu ' l..L'.. e'-0 9/4'RT Nr. M. _ I I I f I I 5nCG0 aarb raw AN TL=./ L=a aro FOAM TM i l m=o mr) li 9rA4%X JM T(TTr) I? 11 11 sn"o a are row m I I C I I s On=SRAOTT ITTF)- II II II I' -Ir;.i aaFII FLOOR _ � _.u — — — — — pro_e/4•FLA.Hr.___ F=0 a ado AW.+W II II I 11 II II I I i t I I I I s I LIUM ADOFMW SIGN it �� I 11 II I� M46'I'IfIAX V@LIS I_ NPB TTPY.AL MurT IElm I FRONDS Mir SGR®AT FOUwAT)ON MR LI! LEFT WOFI.VI Te COCT W ON ALL ulawlt STKOa STA MA.S. 1 •� ^. •„ ,,.,^ ELEVATION A 3F wic.WCeeA•ng 02 Roar a Sv My OW) D.1 . u � y Mew IOVIE®MR ®®AL rnlre 12 a:llA rL/bXllb Mrl •/ b u Nmee Mn b r ------------- ' SUUO a 2.4 POAM TM hTr) I t I I oaalxap Hurl I I I I I I ancco Mrl I I j l I I It i II eM•AMaMM.cart MrJ $2d rrt rwooR I —I I I I - - -'- -'- - T - -'- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I - - - - - - - - - - - rr - - - Il.._._._ 740 9/4'remw Hort M_ I I � � I I ti II II II II II II 11 II 11 it II II II II [aNc PAD II • II II II II II II II it Mom rROAM MW SCI®AT FOMAT"MR LM ON ALL eclawR mw nv MIA REAR - u ELEVATION-B en"o o/6drG FOAM 7RYA(TYPJ S r 02 b OOML.W400A•TUX D.1 ROOT a 50 RLT MPJ 4 mac MP! 11 ❑ b 03 e'-r PLT.irr. D1 b'-10 9/4'iCR M_ sures copes."J �1 �l ((' . .VON~nTPJ I I I I I 6=0 a N4,OWfOW FOAM TFUM I I I I n.RKK Maiwrt orell MPJ— II II II 40 of 2b POM umftwJ _ u II - s I I S=W a 2dO,~0=FOAM MH MPJ I I 6'1-! 0141 F4h9"(fY% 'IWANaMJM"J $2d?kFIDQ! .—'—.— I — —'—.—'—_—.—'—'—'—.— —'—'— —'— — ❑ 'PLT. — '— — —. II e/4M. 9'7119/4 RT.M._ _ _ - B B I 0 PoRCH 140 9/4'YOmFI imp M. II 1 II eecoRATrvesTrcco $'—'— —'—'— —'— .—.—U.— --u eRAO MT MPJ I I I I ❑ I I I sraao a/2�s •mA001359sm o❑El E::]ED ; �M , ) II T ❑❑❑❑❑ i I II "OL"t") �,e.nMoxrerts D� i� ❑❑❑I�❑❑ $0'-O•Pu1.ri.oaR _'— _ I — ❑❑�❑❑❑ �— —I I I I.L. a-0'HK R.00R -rrPICAL ururr MEM M ACZHW k40A%k'M eMALT OILAKW2 OWTCwOry 4 VrLrtT ON FRONT ELEVATION-B PLAtj 2, CR-71 sF mr r �. II I_ II - - - - - - �I• ll II IF 11 II 11 ELI II .II -009' fill ,9- it .; II II If I I I I ar,a wrt 14Ldt II II II - Tao sµ' ICR M. it �16 H 'll II II II II I; II II It �` m it II II II o � II i II II II ;I II II II "' II II II �I II II 111 — _ a-0'Flll FLooa wne. . MMM POP SO®AT.FaWATION PLATE } LIE ONAUFXMWR"XWSMWNLS. o RIGHT y• ^,SI�r}���,.Ji fi fi 1Lr t, F r ELEVATION-B ..f *w;' `��.t�'��r���i!•�'�fi` ' �v'�� .i ? .a. �D,t `I"V'-ii -'�_ J. �AFZ — _ 01 li I II , II II II II II II II I I I I I I Tj I Ir- —II I $T-10 0/4'PImW NOR M. - - - -ti- - - - - - - - - - - - - -,- - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - --I -' r - II II II II II n II II II II li ° II I I Pace 'j itii. I I I I I o I I I' If I II II II PRPAoe Y@P 9CA®AT FOUDATION PLATE L➢! ON ALL Em"m NIKfO Snv VWLs. LFFT ELEVATION-13- ��4N 07 Ai •OORG.TLW"A•TU .. . ROOF o/'JO'PLT12 (nT) e� FM M 4)14101'LOIAAMW WTAL VEM EigM - . MJM MJ64 6(TP) _ .. V 6 MIM MT►) it / d-0 9/4'PLLM. 914'IDR M. _ — II II Sn>cco MTr) i t •cwMrPuta6 MTr) ,TI ED II II •DD'AFGION.gRa MTPJ jl - II II ._._. 4-1 II — — — Ld M I -- II II II II II II II II II -� II II II II II II COC.PAP - II II II II a-0 Pw Pi00R -0.1NOM I I Atovwe Mr.SGT AT P'O"ATION PLATE LRE ON ALL E08WR MW" sm REAR vvus. ELEVATION-G 61— � 12 S •Y.ONG.TUGOOA'n{P K"o/DOP FMT •dum5t MTF) 03 ' — Y I' + — DR M 6''7 O k4'I . wsaRAnveanxco — — — — — — — — — — — — NWAM=T l •DOcM mrJ — -may I SSF. I I I •snKGO o/2N POM DW t") — I I 12 D2 I 1 I STYGGO o/as FOMTM hTP. A}6W1 xw •►J.... I D2 I I eSN MAIN"("i SUC409RAG2f MTPJ ----- ------ -- 2d NIL FLOOR I I dT-0 9/4'PLT.M. J 9'-0 9/4'PLT.M. T-10;U4'17DIY FDR M. — 1"I PORON — — — — —'---' SRWO o/ZM MUM FOAM MM• I I I STIK.Oo of]wb ARlAlD II II �� sTucca MTP) I I = rr• UMMID APVFJW SISN F I 1 roMl TRw -M1d•MGNox yeas--. ... - I L IRY..MY WM PIAMOIT. )MATE Z04T GTPA%-WA w OMY I RPILMY W) FRONT ox RTPJ wln. ELEVATION-G Pl.A(.1 2- f 8-7 1 sF i t2 - GONG.%14M e r r ROOF d we F r ' i W 14W'LOA M4 Fao"I I -L elmee"_ 514'MT. STIY00 4214 I I 11 I I STV"0 fITF) 7-0' II 11 11 I Dw7MFOtT(Tl II II II EWiol 12 T-10_9/4_"M LGR_M. 11 - ti' - - ..... - - - - -'- - - - - '- -'-'FLll II II II jjTull it II II II II II II II II II II II I li 11 I I 11 I I CM.PAD- I' II II II NOIB PRd/IDl:/@ SGMW AT fGLRDATl011 PLATE LM ON ALL Exmm 81w"fmv PNU.S. RIGHT ? i n ELEVATION-G Y'u �^!T t y GONG.wc45 T Sp 1 ' I'„1 � 03 1 -"f —I6 6unei tmn OECORATrA9 I I I I I I BRACM" I; 11 I carEroue rt GTLrXO of 294 II I 1 ANS"J0 I I C Sur"9RAa I I I l 2 S Ond POl FLOOR -- - _TI'- -- - - - - - --- - - - -'- - - - - - - - - - - - - - --'-- - -I� - - - ._._._._.- - - ;i I I I I :o r-b sN•rea�w Nvrt M. II I I I I I(-------- GrLGI.O d 2/ I I I I I I I Snew RTr) II L16Mm Am it I k� II II it I I I I I I I I I HW mowx O'-0•MN FLOOR wm TYPICAL boon W-M PROVIDE 113Y SMW AT FO,NOATION PLATE LRE ((,OpIm11ATE EXALT. O(ALL FXWWK Sn"O STA KALLS. PPA L IJ GMTV t Vn VENT GALGULATIONS: —� LEFT le ox(TYPJ ELEVATION-G , OP eor Tas D11 78 FLY mT) a l— LOATRW METAL Von _ .F w RTp b'•10}/4'IDR M. aM FOAM TRIM tT?) fn TII II II II II ' 'Jxff t") I I I I I I II ane rwL noaR I I - - -'-'- - -'-- ti-'- - II II • � T-10 9/ L 4'TbDYI FDR M. _ II � II II II II II I II II II II II •�" II II II II II II II II II II li MW WE ramoI'F�'J�AT f; /EAR PAwOATCN PLA1E YE ON ILL WWR ST=Som POLLS. 02 ELEVATION-D b 2 D.1 L2 COVA'TLe 16 04 PLT(TY?) UAM OK VENT b 1- SlIKGO a 24 fr) { snCOo a 26 B'•O 9H'PLT_M.-,.- _ - FOAM TRW '2.4 FOAM TRIM terry I I I I rt(m'J I I I I na I I I I STKOO I I I I I I do w TRIM dowrT(TTr) I (I IFMM-lm I I ® aI I u aaFaLFIanR IISH= - - - � b .. . . --- —- _ _ _ I - II M. i I- 9-0 9/4'PLT. $'-"- - - -'- -'- -'- - - -' - .......II $' '- - T-w) HDR ff. _ I ae role+" 1 A I I II ❑❑ ❑❑❑❑ , iDDQ765" I�(y rTat TV! OEGORA J] I I I I o I I sTN.LO a 24D,1 I I �^ F I I Rw+ roN+T pox vans m I I ��❑❑(❑�❑❑❑ ;' J a-0 Pwt t m - —-4 tj l - - - El El D rtartr MEm F.Aca4wr Al!F'I`T OLEAfRAP" FRONT ORT r Dram co! ELEVATION-D PLAiJ 2- 106"71 SF M 9/4'PLT.xr_ FID II II :I s II II II 1 0 II II I II II II Y I I 71 I I I I 3d FTK FLOOR i MP i�iA 9�0 9/4'RT.W. _ - - I I 1 I I I T_Ip 9H'MIDK IDR NT. F HI TIF II I II it 11 II II II If II II II it II - I II II II II II li II II II II II II II II c II II II II I e'-0' II II II FLOOR NM PROVW TEER S ®AT FCLOM110N PLALINE MALL OBm 5=0sm KNJA I GH T 12e ELEVATION-D 03 ir�l I,:1�1����{.,.�.{I„JrI-Iy���{-i }. II i L: ' W�i�"{ '{`��_,j�• ,�'' � � }I I'�s`{'♦} ��'Y"``1f�..��.7y.,1 •;" l.I� ..b .M ty'� �^ -K��Y�t ! 6409141 H)k HT_._ r T— II �I II II II / 16 moi' I � II _._._.-._ ----- -------- ------------- _._ _._ _ _ _.- - '('r.. �"�•sn i-'i Yj"'1�"`:.� 9'-09/4'RT.HT. . -.-_ 9/4''-nO-' R HT. - - - --- - - - ----------- ----------- ----- - - - - - - - w- - + II II II II + II II II II II n II II II I II II I I FSa II It I II II II I LAE I I O''-0`PML FLOOR MOB MWME Mar SUM AT FO VATION PLATE Lle LEFT ON ALL!%1@IIOR 157W,40 SW YVLL5. ELEVATION-D Pty PLAN MAP C-C."Go" gaWdO1343'a S.gnS)t4VId I 9 OO.Z_o7_F -o(vtF6 T � 06 BAR 20 PM 4: 30 '61 5 q ao'pt�iEfJ DEP lit Bstil I ULV ai '13 O_j La vc um Sr to 100 17 10/17 - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - %GL 7�73 D %Vt 'X3 3 NA — — — — —— — JV d � xj-`"­'05 0 'j 0 37, 1.31 cc i,.0 I -V 2�1 1�r t' Li K_ ®R a V t' 39' UJQ rNI .1 - '\ '�� l J� Lu �iE 23'1 LAJ 0 Cj)0 4 2'_ cc �z IA L6'2c .01 T dc ,, 01- L'99+ yj �ov-tjj 01 C14A_ ONN 0, 7- 3NV� GOOMS 0 5)i 3.71 `1 0 �� cf Oro 6S:'z"d_t OO!4._. ja i r , � �y °�WY QQ t W�� � 2STHE ?5 R� �ju -4 39' z VV, oi ;j. ni CL (08 2 3' L DA C. 'C 09 Ad 00 We � IHONV8' 3NVI V1 b 69'99 0 Ad A al 25 07 �' I . 5-34 .4-) f ORDINANCE NO. 2006-25 (Re-Zoning Land in the Martinez Area) The Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors ordains as follows: SECTION I: Page G-13 of the County's 2005 Zoning Map (Ord. No. 2005-03) is amended by re-zoning the land in the above area shown shaded on the map(s) attached hereto and incorporated herein.(see also Community Development Department File No. RZ053154 .) FROM: Land Use District M-12 ( Multiple Family Residential ) TO: Land Use District P-1 ( Planned Unit ) and the Community Development Director shall change the Zoning Map accordingly, pursuant to Ordinance Code Sec. 84.2.002. : 0 �c oc. Martinez d\ rtinez SECTION II. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance becomes effective 30 days after passage, and within 15 days of passage shall be p ublished once with the names of supervisors voting for and against it in the �d/?�ra �' �t�� T, i-n�s , a newspaper published in this County. PASSED on _,!✓ U22 a:�KJk� by the following vote: SUPERVISOR AYE NO ABSENT ABSTAIN 1. J. Gioia 2. G. B. Uilkema (>t) ( ) ( ) ( ) 3. M. N. Piepho 4. M. DeSaulnier ( ) ( ) ( ) 5. F. D. Glover ATTEST: John Cullen, County Administrator Sohn tri oi,a and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors rn c/4u C� Chairman of the Board By , Dep. (SEAL) ORDINANCE NO. 2006-25 RZ053154 Bill Kelleher -`0 ID:--COHTRA --:n-::sTA COUHT`( CLERK OF THE SULT DATE R-T I ME DISTAIA7 S'if�TIIDIHI 11.) MCIDE PAC E' FE'D CIO'2R 97)59478-1)5`-+ A C K, 0000 09:46 f-ONTRiq COSTI.-I C01_A-11Y OF THE: HO.299 'RE"'LlISITION A`Y1CN -U-B LEGAL P st", C'ounty Contra (- ,) a FROM: Clerk of the Board Contra C(,,),sta Times 651 Pine St., Room 106 P.O. Box 4718 Pine Street, Martinez 94553 Walnut Creek, (:A 94596 FA X No. 925-943-8-159 Requested by: -fteference NO.: Phone No.: Oro . Tas, k: : 1,;-;tib Object: z1 7 e, VU l€U I luoMull Jay J N 0. (;it p',I ges LEGAL PUBLICATION F LEGAL PUBLICATION REQUISITION Contra Costa County SrA COUKT� FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: Contra Costa Times 651 Pine St., Room 106 P.O. Box 4718 Pine Street, Martinez 94553 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 E-MAIL: cctlegals@cctimes.com FAX No. '925-943-8359 Requested by: �u.�.e ��2� � Date: �D Phone No.: � Reference No.: Org.: QO Sub Object: Task: Activity: Publication Date (s) No. of Pages: 45e Ller' 1 LEGAL PUBLICATION *** Immediately upon expiration of publication, *** send in one affidavit for each publication in order that the auditor may be authorized to pay you bill. Authorized Signature: Please confirm date of publication and receipt of this fax. =ya, -1--�QA -q-zx Laver � 4- g/ 3-75 '� 3 G�� NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS MARTINEZ AREA NOTICE is hereby.given that on Tuesday,June 27,2006 at 1:00 p.m. in the County Administration ;y Building, 651 Pine Street,Room 107 (Corner of Pine and Escobar Streets),Martinez, California,the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing to consider the following planning matter: DAVID O. ISAKSON(Applicant)—WILLIAM KELLEHER(Owner) A. Countv File#RZ053154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple Residential—M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District—P-1 Zonii.g District with a variance to the five acre minimum. B. Countv File#DP053002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences (1787 and 1871 square feet) on 1.10 acres of property. (Parcel# 161-270-011). The location of the subject property is within the unincorporated territory of the County of Contra Costa County, State of California, generally identified below(a more precise description may be examined in the Office of the Director of Community Development,-County Administration Building,Martinez, California): The location of the subject site is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard,Martinez. For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (no Environmental Impact Report required)has been issued for this,project. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to,the public hearing. Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday, June 27`h at 12:30 p.m. in Room 108, Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez,to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3) clarify the issues being considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Rose Marie Pietras, Community Development Department, at(925) 335-1216 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday, June 26"', 2006 to confirm your participation. Date: June 13, 2006 John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and Cou.zty Administrator By Katherine Sinclair, Deputy Clerk "Contra Costa Times Legals" To KSinc@cob.cccounty.us <cciaegals@cctimes.com> cc 06/15/2006 10:39 AM EPlease respond to bcc ,-ctlegals@cctimes.com Subject Publication Request-Isakson THE FOLLOWING e-mail contains pertinent information; please read it carefully in its entirety. PLEASE NOTE:All of our offices will be closed Independence Day, Tuesday, July 4, 2006. Good Morning;. I send confirmations as a courtesy after having actually entered the legal notices into our ad-booking system. Unfortunately, depending on how busy I am, I may not send confirmations until the business day it goes to press. Also, effective 6 PM, Tues., 05/02, the cctlegals(c)cctimes.com e-mail address automatically confirms receipt with the wording: "The email that you have lust sent has been received by the Legals Desk for Contra_ Costa Times, Concord Transcript and Contra Costa Sun." If you have any questions regarding the legal notice confirmed below, please reference the LEGAL NUMBER provided. Only e-mail to cctlegals(k,)cctimes.com regarding Contra Costa Times, Concord Transcript, or Contra Costa Sun legal notices. ** LEGAL SCHEDULE CONFIRMATION** TYPE: In-Column Liner, Classified Section LEGAL NUMBER: 5967 PO#: F05508 11187' Publication: CCT Run Date(s): 06/17 Legal Acct#: 200 4197 Total Amount: $179.20 FOR YOURINFORMATION-Revisions/Cancellations: I will need a cancellation request referencing the LEGAL NUMBER—or all changes attached in a final draft Mi(.;rosoft Word Document—e-mailed to cctlegals(acctimes.com by no later than 4 PM today, Thurs., 06/15. Otherwise, the wording of the legal will publish as you e-mailed. Thanks! Anashia Lloyd. Legal Advertising Coordinator (925) 943-801:) (925) 943-8359—fax Contra Costa Times ATTN: Legal Dept. P.O. Box 4718 ti Walnut Creek, CA 94596 cctlegals@cctimes.com BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING IN THE MATTER OF: DAVID O. ISAKSON (Applicant)—WILLIAM KELLEHER(Owner) A. Coun File.#RZO53154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple Residential—M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District—P-1 Zoning District with a variance to the five acre minimum. B. Cott File#DPO53002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences (1787 and 1871 square feet) on 1.10 acres of property. (Parcel# 161-270-011). I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned have been, a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited:Certified Mail with Contra Costa County Central Service for mailing by the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, first class postage fully prepaid, a copy of the hearing notice, on the above entitled matter to the following: PLEASE SEE ATTACHED LIST I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct, at Martinez, California. Dated: June 14, 2006 Katherine Sinclair,Deputy Clerk a 159220011 159230002 159230003 YARDE-BARTLETT MICHELLE FIELD BROTHERS BODHAINE RANDALL C &C I TRE 4791 PACHECO BLVD 11 EMBARCADERO W#215 PO BOX 23366 MARTINEZ CA 94553 OAKLAND CA 94607 PLEASANT HILL CA 94523 159230006 161021009 161022001 CHURCH OF GOD AT MARTINEZ BRADDOCK& LOGAN ASSOCIATES NAREZ RICHARD S 4769 PACHECO BLVD PO BOX 5300 2504 ROLLING HILLS CT MARTINEZ CA 94553 DANVILLE CA 94526 ALAMO CA 94507 161050008 .161262009 161262015 CITATION HOMES ERDEI VICTOR GUNSUL THOMAS 2777 ALVARADO ST 4736 PACHECO BLVD 4754 PACHECO BLVD SAN LEANDRO CA 94577 MARTINEZ CA 94553 MARTINEZ CA 94553 161262021 161262022 161270002 KNOBLOCH ROBERT&CHRISTINE OBRIEN AT PACHECO LLC LEWIS DEBORAH O FAMTR 4734 PACHECO BLVD 2001 WINWARD WAY#200 998 GRAYSON LN MARTINEZ CA 94553 SAN MATEO CA 94404 PLEASANT HILL CA 94523 161270011 161270017 161570001 KELLEHER WILLIAM J MCKIERNAN JOHN R TRE H & B PROPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 906 HARBOR VIEW DR 1125 B ARNOLD DR#180 1306 MASTERSON LN MARTINEZ CA 94553 MARTINEZ CA 94553 LAFAYETTE CA 94549 161570002 161570003 161570004 H& B PROP RTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PRO RTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PRO RTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MA ERSON LN 1306 MA ERSON LN 1306 M ERSON LN LAFAY E CA 94549 LAFAY E CA 94549 LAFAY TTE CA 94549 16157000KERSON 161570006 . 161570007 H& B PRY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PR ERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PR ERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MA LN 1306 M TERSON LN 1306 M TERSON LN LAFAY ECA 94549 LAFA TTE CA 94549 LAFA TTE CA 94549 16157000 161570009 161574ERSON H & B P PERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B P PERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 ASTERSON LN 1306 STERSON LN 1306 MLN LAF ETTE CA 94549 LAF ETTE CA 94549 LAFAY4549 1615700 161570012 161570013 H & B P OPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B P PERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PR ERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 ASTERSON LN 1306 M STERSON LN 1306 M TERSON LN LAFAYETTE CA 94549 LAFA ETTE CA 94549 LAFA TTE CA 94549 16157001 16157YTTE 161570016 H & B P OPERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & BTY SOLUTIONS LLC H &B PRO ERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 ASTERSON LN 1306 SON LN 1306 MA ERSON LN LAF ETTE CA 94549 LAFAA 94549 LAFAY E CA 94549 161570017 161570018 161570019 H & B PROP RTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROPER SOLUTIONS LLC H & BPR ERTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 MA ERSON LN 1306 MAST ON LN 1306 M TERSON IN LAFAYE; E CA 94549 LAFAYET CA 94549 LAF ETTE CA 94549 f 161570020 161570021 H & B P PERTY SOLUTIONS LLC H & B PROP RTY SOLUTIONS LLC 1306 STERSON LN 1306 MA ERSON LN LAFA ETTE CA 94549 LAFAY E CA 94549 BUIDLING INSPECTION PUBLIC WORKS PUBLIC WORKS FLOOD CONTROL ENGINEERING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CC FIRE DISTRICT 651 Pine Street—2nd Floor NW 651 Pine Street—4th Floor NW DARWIN MYERS PATRICK ROCHE Historical Resources Information Foundation Center, Building 300 MT. VIEW SANITARY CONTRA COSTA WATER 1303 Maurice Avenue PO BOX 2757 PO BOX H2O Sonoma State University MARTINEZ CA 94553 CONCORD CA 94524 Rohnert Park, CA 94928-•3608 CITY OF MARTINEZ MARTINEZ UNIFIED SCHOOL PACHECO MAC 525 HENRIETTA STREET DISTRICT 5800 PACHECO BLVD MARTINEZ CA 94553 921 SUSANA STREET PACHECO CA 94553 MARTINEZ CA 94553 NOTICE OF A PLIBLIC EARING You are hereby notified that on at 7:00 p.m. in Room 107, McBrien Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, the County Planning Commission will consider REZONING. PRELIMINARY AND FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN applications as described as follows: DAVID O. ISAKSON (Applicant) —WILLIAM KELLEHER (Owner) A. Countv File #RZ053154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple Residential — M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District— P-1 Zoning District with a variance to the five acre minimum. B. County File #DP053002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences (1787 and 1871 square feet) on 1.10 acres of property. The subject. property's address is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard in the Martinez area. (M-12) (ZA: G-13) (CT: 3200.02) (Parcel # 161-270-011). For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (no Environmental Impact Report required) has been issued for this project. If you challenge the project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to, the public hearing. For further details, contact the Contra Costa County Community Development Department, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, California, or Rose Marie Pietras at 925-335-1216. Dennis M. Barry, AICP Community Development Director Kathy Sinclair/COB/CCC To cctlegals@cctimes.com 11/02/2005 10:00 AM cc 4 bcc .dtittct�r ..J�e Subject Publication Request-Isakson Hi Anashia, Please publish the attached legal notice in the CCTimes: One dray only, Saturday June 17, 2006 Reference PO#: 1187 Please confirm receipt of request. Should you have any questions, please call me at the number listed below. Thank you, Kathy Sinclair Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County 925.335.1902 Isakson PAZ-DP-06-27.06.doc NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS MARTINEZ AREA NOTICE is hereby given that on Tuesday,June 27,2006 at 1:00 p.m. in the County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Room 107 (Corner of Pine and Escobar Streets),Martinez, California,the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing to consider the following planning matter: DAVID O.ISAKSON(Applicant)—WILLIAM KELLEHER(Owner) A. Countv File#RZ053154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple;Residential—M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District—P-1 Zonii g District with a variance;to the five acre minimum. B. Coun File#DP053002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences (1787 and 1871 square feet)on 1.10 acres of property. (Parcel# 161-270-011). The location of the subject property is within the unincorporated territory of the County of Contra Costa County, State of California,generally identified below(a more precise description may be examined in the Office of the;Director of Community Development, County Administration Building,Martinez, California): The location of the subject site is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard,Martinez. For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (no Environmental Impact Report required)has been issued for this project. If you challenge;the project in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to,the public hearing. Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday,June 270'at 12:30 p.m. in Room 108,Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez,to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3)clarify the issues being;considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff,please call Rose Marie Pietras, Community Development Department,at(925)335-1216 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday,June 26'h, 2006 to confirm your participation. Date: June 13, 2006 John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By-- � r Katherine Sinclair,Deputy Clerk NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON PLANNING MATTERS MARTINEZ AREA NOTICE is hereby given that on Tuesday,June 27,2006 at 1:00 p.m. in the County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Room 107 (Corner of Pine and Escobar Streets),Martinez, California,the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors will hold a public hearing to consider the following planning matter: DAVID O.ISAKSON(Applicant)—WILLIAM KELLEHER(Owner) A. Countv File#RZ053154: The applicant requests approval to rezone a 1.10 acre parcel from Multiple:Residential—M-12 Zoning District to Planned Unit District—P-1 Zonii.g District with a variance to the five acre minimum. B. Countv File#DP053002: The applicant requests approval for preliminary and final development plan to establish eight single-family residences (1787 and 1871 square feet)on 1.10 acres of property. (Parcel# 161-270-011). The location of the subject property is within the unincorporated territory of the County of Contra Costa County, State of California, generally identified below(a more precise description may be examined in the Office of the:Director of Community Development, County Administration Building,Martinez, California): The location of the subject site is 4776 Pacheco Boulevard,Martinez. For purposes of compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Significance (no Environmental Impact Report required)has been issued for this project. If you challenge the project in court,you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the County at, or prior to, the public hearing. Prior to the hearing, Community Development Department staff will be available on Tuesday, June 27`''at 12:30 p.m. in Room 108,Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, to meet with any interested parties in order to (1) answer questions; (2)review the hearing procedures used by the Board; (3) clarify the issues being considered by the Board; and(4)provide an opportunity to identify,resolve, or narrow any differences which remain in dispute. If you wish to attend this meeting with staff, please call Rose Marie Pietras, Community Development Department, at(925) 335-1216 by 3:00 p.m. on Monday, June 26"', 2006 to confirm your participation. Date: June 13, 2006 John Cullen, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator By J � Katherine Sinclair,Deputy Clerk